government regulation

Silence of the Lambs

 

This drawing is in response to the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act. What a lovely title. It almost makes you feel like they’ve done something to make politicians less corrupt. What they’ve really done is tell you who you can support and how much you can give them. Don’t be fooled by the tripe about getting the money out of politics. The guys with big money on both sides can find ways around something as insignificant as a little law. They already have in most cases. All it really does is make it harder for the little guy who’s trying to follow the law to exercise his right to free speech and to vote.

Making politics more transparent and less driven by money is a load and we all know it. There’s not much else to say. We all know these guys are just trying to stay in office and keep anyone new off their turf. People who break the rules under one system will do so under any system. Legislation doesn’t change that, it just makes things harder for people who follow the law.

The imagery in this drawing illustrates the red tape of government regulation silencing the people. We do this to ourselves when we continue to vote the same people into office year after year because of party loyalty. This is just one more reason I support term limits and hope to see third party philosophies become more popular. Completed – 2007
Medium: Charcoal and ink on paper
Dimensions: 24w x 24h x 1d

Additional blogs regarding the First Amendment:

The Fairness Doctrine Looms on the Horizon

The Fairness Doctrine Looms on the Horizon, Pt.2

Frances Byrd is the National Director of Liberatchik.com, and a contributing writer at Western Free Press and FreedomWorks. Her articles and interviews have been published at Blog Bytes , Big Hollywood, and WND . Mrs. Byrd’s conceptual art and writing can be viewed at MachinePolitick.

Alinsky, Social Justice and a Cultural Revolution

#TheRevolutionaryHaloOfSocialJustice
The Revolutionary Halo of (Social)Justice

 

… to the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.” – Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals 1971

 

Alinsky’s dedication at the beginning of Rules for Radicals is telling of his personal morality and ultimate goals. Those who blindly follow the current purveyors of his philosophy, within our government, higher learning institutions and social organizations, would do well to examine his/their true motives and the consequences of following in the footsteps of a man who would pay homage to the ideological embodiment of evil.

 

Developing Iconography

 

There is no need to put words in Alinsky’s mouth or take his ideas out of context. There is no need to spin his philosophy like some two-bit mainstream journalist. Alinsky’s words speak clearly for him and his intent in all their wretched meaning. For this reason, several of his quotes were utilized in the under-painting for The Revolutionary Halo of (Social)Justice.

This painting is part of an ongoing series based upon stylized American Crow iconography I am developing. Though the series started out as an illustration of the OWS movement, it quickly grew to encompass progressive thought in general as well as the societal and individual consequences of its implementation.

 

(Social)Justice is an allegorical portrait of Saul Alinsky, one of the most influential progressives in American history. In Rules for Radicals, he laid the groundwork and strategy for an all encompassing transformation of American thought and culture across institutional, economic and social boundaries. This painting attempts to capture the essence of those ideas.

 

The Progressive Tactic of Fomenting Despair

 

Early in the book, Alinsky quotes Dostoyevsky: “… Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future…”

 

Do you see a connection between these ideas and the current events sweeping America today? This quote by Dostoyevsky, as used by Alinsky, points to an agenda that encourages people to disregard the historic failures and precedents of statist ideology and its implementations across the globe. It encourages one to turn a blind eye to the deliberate destruction and loss of life at the hands of an elitist few. It then calls for a blind faith in the motives and power of that elite few rather than in individual responsibility and participatory self-governance.

 

The Common Good

 

The price of democracy is the ongoing pursuit of the common good by all of the people”.

 

With this quote, we start to see how the progressive movement started to change the people’s knowledge of America as a representational republic, to a belief in America as a democracy. This is based on an agenda of steering the populace toward support of mob rule, which devolves into tyranny and a dependence on the state for structure and support. The old saw goes: “If you repeat a lie often enough, people begin to take it as truth”. Like the raucous caw of a crow, the populist mantra silences the voice of reason.

What is the goal of this redefinition of terms and intentional deception? First, it is anti-individual and purposefully vague in order to allow the elitist controlling class to redefine terms of duty and sacrifice as being for the common good. It softens the populace to the idea of redistribution of goods and services based on impact toward the common good. And, the very vagueness of the idea, gives those in control the ability to change course and redefine these very terms as needed.

 

People will rally behind the ideas of freedom and justice, even when they are denied these institutions themselves. The challenge and the power come in presenting an agenda in a way that appeals to the emotions first; to make people feel disenfranchised, victimized and entitled to compensation. Once this is achieved, it is a small step to organize them into an activist mob disinterested in the moral implications of their actions.

In fact, Alinsky goes so far as to consider moral concerns a bourgeois affectation; impracticable in the real world. His approach builds on Hobbes’ belief that men are essentially savages in a brutish world. But, rather than merely suggest that a leviathan state is the only method with which to control the vagaries of barbarism, he encourages his followers to take advantage of their collective barbarity at the expense of society.

Quotes in the Painting

I have incorporated some pop culture references and direct quotes from Rules for Radicals in the under-painting. Upon closer examination, the more relevant portions show through, inviting the viewer to step up and examine the painting closely. Of course, the crow stands alone as a piece of art, so it is not particularly relevant for you to know what it means. What it does is engage you directly as a means to open dialogue on the subject portrayed in the painting. The Revolutionary Halo of (Social)Justice is intended to inspire a closer examination of Mr. Alinsky’s model for social destruction and reformation. I leave you, for now, with some quotes from the under-painting.

“Some men can’t be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.” – Alfred, The Dark Knight 2008

“…if one lacks the luxury of a choice and is possessed of only one means, then the ethical question will never arise…” – Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals 1971

“To me, ethics is doing what is best for the most”. – Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals 1971

 

Frances Byrd is the National Director of Liberatchik.com, and a contributing writer at Western Free Press and BlogBytes.Her articles have also been published at Big Hollywood. Mrs. Byrd’s conceptual art and writing can be viewed at MachinePolitick.

 

Editorial Cartoonist Portrays Ted Cruz as a Clown

Using Art to Push an Agenda 101

While clipping news articles for some upcoming mixed media projects, I came across this cartoon:

CruzClown

You and I may find it absurd; but we are not the target audience.

This cartoon is from the Athens Banner Herald in Georgia (hometown to the University of Georgia). As one might guess, Athens is your average college town; primarily liberal in mindset. Athens is also closely surrounded by a smattering of small suburbs and low-income areas before reverting to its rural/agrarian heritage, where people think of Athens in terms of football and ag programs – and little else.

Ironically, it is know-it-all college kids on their high horses of progressive indoctrination who will be among those most surprised, and directly effected, by the gargantuan health care law’s implementation. The average estimate projects that young Americans will see a 260% increase in premiums under the ACA, even though those same young Americans voted for democrats and a president, in part, to push this law through on the rest of us.

To be fair, some of the low-income voters and farmers in the area may have thought the bill a good idea as well, before it was passed so they could see what was in it. Perhaps they were under the impression that some evil rich guy would be paying for their healthcare henceforth and all their worries would come to an end. What a nasty surprise all of these unintended consequences must be for them.

So, why then, do we have a local paper bothering to print a cartoon ridiculing Cruz for his opposition to the ACA? If the Herald is preaching to the choir, what’s the point?

The point is, many in the choir have changed their tune, and their song has become discordant. Some people, who were perfectly happy to ignore the consequences for the rest of us as long as they thought they would be exempt, have woken up. Unfortunately for them, they have awakened to the reality of government mandated healthcare.

 

Rules for Radicals, or Those Merely Pretending to Be

 

So, amidst all of the policy debates and emotional bickering, what is the significance of one cartoon? We must defer to the wisdom(evil) of Saul Alinsky for understanding on these points.

 

First, it is designed to ridicule a Senator for doing his job: defending the constitution, as well as, the rights and concerns of his constituents. As I have explained in several previous articles, progressives use derision and character assassination to destroy the credibility of their opposition. True or not, fair or not, this tactic works. Once you consider a Senator a clown, are you really going to listen to anything he has to say?

 

For Progressives, and some GOP establishment cronies, it is enough to call Cruz a clown and consider the discussion over. That’s fine if you’re exempt from the law you passed in the first place; but what about the rest of us? For those of us who are not receiving exemptions or subsidies, the ACA is a question of constitutionality and economic impact… whatever the Supreme Court may say to the contrary. (For a more lengthy explanation of these points, I refer you to the Federalist Papers and Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments).

 

Secondly, this cartoon is a perfect example of how progressives use culture, however insignificant, to push their agendas. You may pass a mere cartoon off as inconsequential if you even notice it at all. You may not consider it art and wonder the point I am making.

A cartoon may not be fine art, but it does have cultural significance – even more so based on its ability to reach a broader range of viewers through mass publication. Is it likely to change the minds of people like me who support Cruz? No. But it may plant a seed of doubt in the minds of people on the fence about the law. It will certainly bolster the resolve of the law’s supporters, justifying their subsequent reactions to and treatment of those in opposition.

 

Did you notice the Freudian slip and the irony contained within this cartoon? Uncle Sam is ill, but his cure won’t come from big government intrusion in the lives of its citizens. Besides, he’s old. It’s likely he’s not eligible for anything beyond end of life counseling and painkillers – while there’s still funding for such things.

 

Where’s the Conservative Alternative?

While some members of congress and the conservative media are taking a stand, where is the conservative art community on this issue? You wouldn’t know outside of Ramirez’s and Branco’scartoons because very few are giving a cultural approach a second thought on our side. Nobody with any mass influence, anyway. (That’s a subject for a future article of some length.)

Once again, our side is turning its back on one of the most influential and readily available means to effect policy debate in America. The results for our future are both disastrous and predictable.

Frances Byrd is the National Director of Liberatchik.com, and a contributing writer at Western Free Press and BlogBytes. Her articles have also been published at Big Hollywood . Mrs. Byrd’s conceptual art and writing can be viewed at MachinePolitick.

The Liberty Amendments, A Summary

LibertyAmendments

 

 

 

 

Rather than inject personal opinion or support for the proposals outlined in Mr. Levin’s book, I offer a summary of its contents in the hope that you will read it and come to your own conclusions. I hope, very much, that you will then be compelled to take some form of action, for to do nothing at this point in our history, would be sheer folly.

Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments, a Review

An Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Congress

…quotes Madison, from Federalist #48, “An elective despotism was not the government we fought for… but [one] in which the powers be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.

In its original formation, the US congress was split into two very distinct houses, which were intended as checks on one another as well as on the executive branch. Today, congress works together to maintain power rather than fulfilling their duties as representatives of the American people and do little or nothing to obstruct the machinations of an over-reaching executive.

The Senate, originally elected by the state legislatures, was intended to prevent the federal government encroaching on the rights of the states. The House of Representatives, conversely, was meant to directly represent the rights and concerns of the people. Neither was intended to be a lifelong appointment, with relatively high pay and benefits or exemptions above those available to the people they represented. Their offices were intended, rather, as a civic duty to their nation and their fellow man.

The negative impact of our modern, insider culture, is most apparent in the many and convoluted ways in which the congress shuts out all but the most persistent and popular of new-comers to the Capitol. To be fair, and this is discussed in the book as well, this culture is rampant at the state and local levels as well. The incumbents, regardless of party affiliation, work together to keep challengers to their virtual thrones at bay. Term limits would return the power of self-governance to the people by limiting the power of politicians and the incentive to focus on their own gains at the expense of their constituency.

The consent of the governed is the hallmark of a constitutional government.

 

An Amendment to Restore the Senate

As discussed briefly in the previous section, it is imperative that we repeal the 17th Amendment which allows for the popular election of senators. After generations of progressive efforts to re-define the governmental and societal structure of America, it has become commonplace for the people to refer to our nation as a democracy. In short, democracy is mob rule, and is in no way better than a dictatorship. Our government was set up with checks and balances in an effort to curtail all forms of tyranny, including that of the many over the few. The Reign of Terror is an historical example of the ‘unintended’ outcome of democratic governance that Americans would do well to investigate more closely.

Critics of a republican form of government will disingenuously equate it’s nature to the current manifestation of the Republican party, knowing full well that the term means something else entirely. The terms republic, republican, democracy, and democratic, as used here have vastly different meanings that are no longer common knowledge.

In addition to restoring the Senate to its intended status as a representative of the individual state governments, Levin’s proposed amendment allows the state legislatures to remove a senator by two thirds vote if they fail to uphold their duties as a representative of that state. This allows for a more direct balance of power between the state and federal governments and provides an additional curtail to the power and encroachment of the federal government.

 

An Amendment to Establish Term Limits for the Supreme Court Justices and Super-Majority Legislative Override

This chapter sets forth the argument for establishing term limits on the Supreme Court. It also allows, in a similar way, for the over-ruling by congress of Supreme Court rulings that deviate into activism and judicial revisionism rather than adherence to the rule of law.

Because the Supreme Court has repeatedly shown an inclination toward societal restructuring and constitutional relativism, this amendment is among the most important proposed in the book. It allows for congress and the state legislatures to maintain checks and balances on the Court, thus curtailing future abuses of power.

The proposal of term limits for the Court, likewise puts checks on the accumulation of power and ability of the justices to legislate through judicial fiat. By indicating the inability of the President to veto a judicial override by the states and/or congress, this amendment eliminates the unhealthy relationship that has developed between the Judicial and Executive branches of our government.

 

Two Amendments to Limit Federal Spending and Taxing

This chapter is relatively straightforward and requires little explanation. It offers additional restrictions on the power of the federal government as well as solutions to the ills created by the current system of redistribution and subsidy that create the over-grown power structure in DC.

In short, this amendment demands that the federal government set a budget and live within its means. Rather than granting the government the power to declare a single industry too big to fail or to create incentives to favoritism, it scales back the system of lobbying for congressional favor.

Limiting the government’s ability to tax is a crucial step in this process. Whether one agrees with Mr. Levin’s proposal to cap income tax or prefers a national sales tax, it cannot be argued that nothing should be done in this regard. Conversely, the populist rhetoric of soaking the rich has been proven historically as false and detrimental to society as a whole – however much the progressive establishment may disagree.

Finally, rescheduling the deadline for filing income taxes to correspond with federal elections is a good solution to the myopic nature of the American voter. It is less likely that the antics of our celebrity culture or political distractions promoted by the media would obscure from the people who is directly responsible for their personal tax burden if elections directly followed the filing of taxes.

 

An Amendment to Limit the Federal Bureaucracy

This chapter sets limits on the establishment and longevity of federal departments and appointments, regulations, economic impact of said regulations and length of time allowed for actions setting such limits. It reminds us that the separation of powers doctrine contained with in the Constitution, not only sets limits on the power entrusted in each branch of the government, but also prevents any of those branches from delegating their powers to one another or to agencies or departments not elected directly by the people. This is particularly important in light of the modern expansion of cabinet appointments, government agencies and executive orders issued at the expense of the people without any method of recourse; including, but not limited to the passage of laws that members of government and select groups are themselves exempted from. This degradation of our Constitution illustrates …the necessity and urgency of restoring constitutional republicanism and preserving the civil society from the governing authoritarianism of a federal Leviathan…

 

An Amendment to Promote Free Enterprise

This Amendment clarifies the original intent behind the Commerce Clause, which has been repeatedly abused by the Legislative and Judicial branches of the government. In addition, it sets clear boundaries for its use and returns the majority of power to the states for defining commerce and regulating any issues that may arise on this subject.

With the Commerce Clause, more than any other, we have seen the greatest erosion of the Constitution through judicial activism and legislative abuses. In short, our own government has made a concerted effort to rewrite the Constitution for their own gain; thus proving the need for the Constitution, Bill of Rights and separation of powers outlined in our nation’s founding.

When the government can go so far as to penalize people for not spending money, under the guise of protecting the common good, we are well down the road to socialism. In other words, the nation has entered into an age of post-constitutional soft tyranny. In closing the chapter, Mr. Levin provides us this quote from Milton Friedman: “Freedom in economic arrangements is itself a component of freedom broadly understood, so economic freedom is an end in itself… Economic freedom is also an indispensable means toward the achievement of political freedom.”

 

An Amendment to Protect Private Property

This amendment more clearly defines individual property rights and sets clear restrictions on government infringement on those rights. In addition, it defines just compensation in the event that clearly defined public need necessitates transfer of property from an individual to the government. The chapter goes on to define the social compact of a civil society and warn against the evils of redistribution of wealth from one citizen to another by dictate or by direct seizure of property by the government.

 

An Amendment to Grant the States Authority to Directly Amend the Constitution

This amendment returns state sovereignty to the forefront of our governing process and allows for the states to roll back and prevent further expansion of the federal government. It defends the individual’s rights, allows for the maintenance of a stable and just form of government that protects the rights of all of its citizens, thus preserving society as a whole.

 

An Amendment to Grant the States Authority to Check Congress

This amendment allows the states to reign in the Congress’ power to grant favors and punish through regulation. In addition, it gives the states the power to end the habit of Congress to legislate social justice, punishing or rewarding certain groups at whim and against the wishes of the American people.

Through clearly defined procedure, this amendment sets forth rules for true transparency in government by establishing open posting of bills for public review in advance of congressional voting to establish new laws. No changes to the bill would be allowed between the time of posting and the final vote, increasing accountability and honesty in our legislative branch. In addition, this amendment sets forth guidelines for state overrule of laws, federal statutes and executive orders with clearly defined procedures and limitations on state, as well as federal power.

 

An Amendment to Protect the Vote

Simply put, this amendment requires proof of citizenship to vote. In addition, it makes provisions for those unable to afford the cost of acquiring the required documentation and puts strict limits on early voting procedures. These measures do nothing more or less than take measures to insure the sanctity and validity of every vote cast.

There is no point wasting time debating the probable success or failure of the measures defined in the Liberty Amendments. One cannot accomplish a task if one does not start it. There is no point bemoaning the likely difficulty of the task – we are past that. If we seek to restore our nation to its founding principles as a constitutional republic we must stop complaining and offer solutions. As Mr. Levin so succinctly illustrates in the naming of his final chapter, now is The Time for Action.

This review may be criticized as lacking any meaningful criticism or in-depth examination of the book – so be it. I did not write to tout my own historical knowledge or inject my personal opinion on the author’s personal motivations; as some critics may do. I wrote to highlight the importance of the call to action which it contains and the solutions offered to restore our republic. My review is so heavily footnoted, because this book speaks well enough of itself, in its succinctness and historic notation of the ills of the progressive usurpation of American law and governance.

In a world of media enamored of its own self-importance, it is time to focus on the real issues that affect our lives. It is time to offer solutions, not platitudes and petulant complaints. It is time to take action.

*All direct quotes from the book are indicated by italics*

Frances Byrd is the National Director of Liberatchik.com, and a contributing writer at Western Free Press and BlogBytes. Her articles have also been published atBig Hollywood . Mrs. Byrd’s conceptual art and writing can be viewed at MachinePolitick.

 

 

Is The American Dream a Farce? by Mark Taylor

MT_AmerDream_Cov_sm

For Immediate Release:


New Book Questions “Is the American Dream a Farce?”

Savannah, GA – September 26, 2012

Cover illustration provided by Frances Byrd.


Concerned about the negative impact of our nation’s $16 trillion national debt, runaway government spending and governmental overreach into our private lives, eighteen-year-old Mark Taylor has written a book called Is the American Dream a Farce? published by 5th Corner Publishing. Frances Byrd’s painting “The Hand of Liberty” is featured on the book’s cover.


When asked what motivated him to spend his summer writing a political activism book, Taylor replied: “My book exposes the farce of big government. The skyrocketing $16 trillion national debt will certainly affect my generation. In fact, the detrimental effects of our government’s policies can already be seen in high college tuition rates and dismal youth employment statistics. The time has come for the next generation of Americans to voice our concerns and require elected officials to enact common sense solutions to the economic challenges facing America.”


Taylor continued: “What we need is a back-to-the-future approach—meaning solutions to our nation’s problems can be found by studying the Founding Era. We can learn a lot from the Founding Fathers’ accomplishments. The Founders certainly did not get everything right, but they provided us with an extraordinary plan for constitutionally-limited government, free-market economics, and strong national defense, which allowed Americans to enjoy more freedom and prosperity than any nation in the history of the world. We can maintain American exceptionalism; we just need to follow our owner’s manual for freedom—the United States Constitution. I believe Young Americans of the 21st century will either go down in history as the generation who sat back and idly watched the American dream dissolve, or as the initiators of change who took action and saved our republic from ruin. Young Americans are not just the future; we are the now. It will take all of our efforts to save the American dream.”


Taylor is no stranger to grassroots activism. In 2010, Taylor was selected as one of 72 youth nationwide to attend Young America’s Foundation High School Leadership Conference in Santa Barbara, California where he learned about the political and economic philosophies of President Ronald Reagan. Taylor is a graduate of Leadership Institute’s Youth Leadership School and a TeenPact alumni. Taylor completed a Constitutional Law course at Patrick Henry College in the summer of 2011. Currently, he is a student at Armstrong Atlantic State University in Savannah, Georgia.


Is the American Dream a Farce? by Mark Taylor is available in electronic and print formats from major online booksellers. To contact Mark Taylor, email savefarce@gmail.com. Visit his website at: www.savefarce.com or check out his author page at: www.amazon.com/author/markt

Mark Taylor, author
Mark Taylor, author

This book is available on Amazon in print and for Kindle.

Mark Taylor is a young activist concerned about the future of America. His first book discussing American politics is now available on Amazon.

Atlas Shrugged in 2011?

I received the following article in an email from a close friend today. It is telling and frightening at the same time. I recently reread the book in preparation for a series of paintings paralleling current events and those in the novel.

Ayn Rand Was Right:
Wealthy Are on Strike Against Obama by Wayne Allyn Root


The U.S. economy is crumbling. Businesses are collapsing in record
numbers. Jobs have disappeared. Tax revenues are down dramatically.
Coincidence?

Everything happening today under Obama resembles the storyline of Ayn
Rand’s famous book, Atlas Shrugged, one of the most popular books of all
time, selling over 7 million copies. Now, under President Obama, Atlas
Shrugged has come to life. Rand prophesized a country dominated by
socialists, Marxists and statists, where looters, free loaders and
poverty promoters live off the productive class. To rationalize the
fleecing of innovative business owners and job creators, the looter class
demonized the wealthy, just as Obama and his socialist cabal are doing in
real life today.

The central plot of Atlas Shrugged is that in response to being
demonized, over-taxed, over-regulated, and punished for success,
America’s business owners were disappearing — dropping off the grid, and
refusing to work 16-hour days to support those unwilling to put in the
same blood, sweat and tears. They were going on strike. Because of that
the original proposed title of “Atlas Shrugged” was “The Strike.”

They were going on strike to teach that civilization cannot survive when
people are slaves to government. That without a productive class of
innovative business owners willing to risk their own money and work
16-hour days, weekends and holidays, there are no jobs and no taxes to
pay for government. If you punish the wealthy, the risk-takers, the
innovators, you kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. In Obama’s
America, fiction is becoming fact.

The lesson of Atlas Shrugged is that without the $100,000+ earners paying
into Social Security, there are no pensions for the poor and lower middle
class. Without the wealthy owners of million-dollar mansions paying
$25,000 and $50,000 annual property tax bills, there is no funding for
public schools. Without the wealthy paying into Medicare, there is no
“free” healthcare for the elderly. Without capitalists motivated by
profit, there are no discoveries to eradicate polio or create miraculous
cancer and AIDS drugs. Without capitalists motivated by profit, there are
no jobs, period! That is what happens when the producers of society go on
strike to protect themselves from the looters.

Ayn Rand was warning the looters that there are consequences to their
overzealous actions. She was warning that if the productive classes felt
used, demonized, ripped off, and taken for granted, they would go on
strike — stop working, retire early, go underground, or move to places
where achievement is celebrated and they feel appreciated.

The latest U.S. Census proves Ayn Rand right. Under Obama the wealthy are
striking, voting with their feet. They are moving to low-tax red states
in droves, escaping from high-tax blue states where they are being
demonized and punished by the millions.

The Census proves that Obama’s tax and spend philosophy is a dismal
failure, an economic disaster killing jobs. It is no coincidence that 1.9
million FEWER Americans are working than before Obama’s stimulus. It is
no coincidence that jobs are not returning to the private sector. It is
no coincidence that tax revenues have dropped dramatically and cannot
support Obama’s bloated Big Brother government. The innovators,
risk-takers, and wealthy he demonized and punished are on strike.

The high tech revolution has killed the progressive-liberal tax-and-spend
dream. Because of the Internet, email, Facebook, Twitter, Skype,
Satellite TV, I-phones, I-pads, and cell phones, business owners are no
longer prisoners of Big Brother. Take a look at states where the latest
Census shows Americans moved during the past decade: Nevada, Texas,
Arizona, Florida, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, Alaska, Virginia — all low- or no-tax red states,
states that lead the USA in economic freedom.

Now look at states they escaped from: New York, New Jersey, California,
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan. Taxpayers,
business owners, jobs creators, retirees with assets are fleeing the high
tax, big spending, Big Brother states — the states being run like Obama
is running the nation.

Progressives be afraid, be very afraid. If Obama is re-elected, these
valuable producers will pick up and leave America altogether. There is a
big world out there begging them to come. Places like Hong Kong,
Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Monte Carlo, Belize, Costa Rica,
Panama, Bahamas, and Cayman Islands are low-tax havens that appreciate
business owners and their sacrifices. They welcome wealthy ex-patriots.
They celebrate individual achievement. They reward instead of punish
business owners and financial risk-takers. They are wonderful places to
live and are aggressively pursuing Americans.

I am just one small businessman, a third-party Libertarian political
leader. Yet I personally have heard from thousands of fans, friends and
supporters who have left America, are thinking of leaving America, are
visiting other countries right now to decide where to go, or making
preparations to leave in case Obama is re-elected. Just as Ayn Rand
predicted, business owners are going on strike. Permanently.

The high tech revolution has freed them to run their businesses from
anywhere in the world. The same high tech tools and toys that toppled a
powerful and invincible 30-year dictator in Egypt and now threaten to
topple powerful leaders throughout the Arab world, also offer mobility
and freedom to U.S. taxpayers. Obama better learn the lesson of Mubarek
before millions more business people decide they do not need to put up
with looters, free loaders, and politicians who despise them.

Atlas is shrugging. Ayn Rand is saying “I told you so.”



Frances Byrd is the National Director of Liberatchik.com, a conservative political artist and blogger. Her art can be viewed at MachinePolitick.com.

“There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.”

You really cannot blame the citizens in our entitlement culture who think that they can have their lunch and eat it too. After all, look at the example that their legislators are setting as they coast along on their own free-lunch wagon, creating whatever programs they desire, and then printing paper dollars out of thin air to back them up, with no foreseeable source of revenue in sight — and all the while ignoring the looming debt, the unsustainable deficits, the unresponsive economy, and the rising outcry of protest from the remaining minority of citizens who do understand that there is indeed no free lunch and that the coming catastrophe is going to ultimately be borne on the backs of their productivity.

It’s enough to make a grown person shrug.

Read the full article here.

CPAC Artist: William Harris

I just want to take a quick moment to thank William for a couple of things. He has been one of the earliest partners in the Liberatchik project. Over the last two years of brainstorming and planning, William has been an invaluable source of ideas and insight. Thank you William, for the ideas and support you have given, as well as for those we have set aside for the moment.

I joined the Liberatchik project, because I’d become increasingly interested in what it meant to be liberated in a free society and if this liberation had any functional connection with art. I found that, like the pursuit of happiness of each individual, my own artwork was best liberated with an appreciation of the underlying purpose that gave rise to it. Our desire and drive for stronger families, businesses and communities haven’t been created and sustained due to a spirit of chaos and randomness but by a spirit of purpose. I see this purposeful essence becoming a defining characteristic of the Liberatchik movement in the years to come.

You can view William’s work at his web page.

This article was written for Liberatchik.

CPAC 2011 Artist: James Byrd

Jay is my patient half and is currently the only writer in our group. After fifteen years, he is still supportive of my quirky and manic ways. I just wanted to take a minute to say thanks and introduce him to you, so you would know who he is. I couldn’t have gotten so far with my art without his support and encouragement over the years.

The Light of Day

Those who hate humanity have taken over the environmental movement. The environmental movement has taken over the world’s governments. Those governments have joined together to form The World Consortium on Government, Labor, and the Environment, and have moved everyone underground to isolate people from the environment and save the world. However, not everyone wants to live underground. Not old man O’Hara. That’s why he joined the Resistance, but that was years ago. Now he is living underground with a son who despises him and with whom he has nothing in common; eating synthetic food, breathing synthetic air, and only seeing synthetic light, except when the guards see fit to open the topside. It would be a dismal existence if not for his grandson Jeff. Jeff is everything he imagined his son would be: smart, independent, inquisitive, defiant, everything except free, but that’s about to change.

A series of events that begins with Jeff’s inquisitiveness and ends with his defiance and the death of his grandfather, thrusts him into an unknown world. It’s a world where the sun shines, and the wind blows, where people generate their own electricity and thieves are hanged by the side of the road. Jeff finds love, friendship, the truth about his grandfather and the hero he truly was. He finds that killing and dying for what you believe in is sometimes both necessary and painful.

You can see more of Jay’s writing at Snookie Lane

This article was also posted at Liberatchik


So You Want to Hang On to Those Earmarks? We’ll See About That!

This article is by a fellow blogger, C. Jeffery Small from GoGalt.org. Jeffery has recently updated and renamed his blog and can now be found at Small Thoughts for a Complex World

Earlier today the online news site, Politico, reported that Jim DeMint was marshaling Republicans to get behind a plan to restrict earmarks from future congressional legislation.

You know what we’re talking about here; things like the $300 million Louisiana Purchase, or the $100 million Cornhusker Kickback, or Chris Dodd’s $100 million “grant” for construction of an unspecified Connecticut university hospital, or the grandaddy of them all, the $60 billion Cadillac Tax for the benefit of the Unions, all of which were, at one point, included as part of the recently passed health care (i.e., Obamacare) legislation.

Of course, these follow in the proud tradition of Alaskian Ted Steven’s $230 million Bridge To Nowhere, or Virginia Foxx and Richard Burr’s $500,000 to build a Teapot Museum in Sparta, NC, or then Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill’s $14.6 billion for a 3.5 mile long Massachusetts Big Dig highway project, or $3.4 million to build a Turtle Tunnel in Florida, or $19 million to study the environmental effects of Cow Flatulence. And the list goes on, and on, and on… According to Wikipedia, in 2005, federal legislation contained an estimated 16,000 earmarks totaling roughly $48 billion, and CBS News, reports that the 2010 Federal budget alone contained 5,000 earmarks which totaled roughly $14 billion, which is on top of the 2009 stimulus allocation of $787 billion.

So, considering the mood of the country as was recently exhibited in the mid-term elections, with the voters rejecting sixty-six congressional tax-and-spend progressives and replacing them with fiscal conservative, it would seem like a no-brainer to support DeMint’s proposal to reign in the abuse of earmarks. Right? Well, that’s apparently not how many of the long-standing congressional Republicans see it.

    Politico reports: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is maneuvering behind the scenes to defeat a conservative plan aimed at restricting earmarks, setting up a high-stakes showdown that pits the GOP leader and his “Old Bull” allies against Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and a new breed of conservative senators.

    McConnell’s heightened activity signals what Senate insiders say is real fear among senior members — that the DeMint plan actually stands a serious chance of passing. And that could have uncomfortable implications for a bloc of GOP senators — like McConnell, a member of the Appropriations Committee — who annually send hundreds of millions of dollars for projects in their home states.

    Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, one of the most conservative senators and an unabashed earmarker, plans a blitz on conservative talk radio to make the case that critics have demagogued the earmark issue in order to make their political points that they’re out to reform the excesses of Congress.

    [A] number of senators who voted for the DeMint plan in March are likely “no” votes now, including McConnell, Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and DeMint’s fellow South Carolina senator, Lindsey Graham.

And there you have it. RINOs at work, saying something to the voters out of one side of their mouth, while having absolutely no intention of standing up for our rights, or the principles of liberty. Politics is just a game to these bozos and they have a vested interest in the status quo which allows them to rob the citizens of 49 other states and send the bacon back home to their special interests and campaign contributors.

The election is over and it’s time for us to get back to work, continuing to communicate our expectations, and doing what we can to pressure every one of these two-faced congressional cowards to do the right thing when it comes to specific legislative actions. Here is a letter that I just sent to Mitch McConnell, James Inhofe, Lamar Alexander and Lindsey Graham:

    So You Want to Keep Your Earmarks? Dear Congressman:

    Truly unbelievable! You Republicans haven’t let the ink dry on the election when you are already jockeying to override the message that the people sent to you just one short week ago. You have learned absolutely nothing!

    So you want to hang on to your precious pork, regardless of the harm that this fiasco has inflicted upon the country by inflating the budget year after year with hidden perks for favored members of Congress, and paying off special interests — or those who have made campaign contributions — by concealing these thefts of taxpayer dollars from open scrutiny, honest debate and a public justification.

    WAKE UP! The citizens of this country have had enough of this political corruption, and we are not going to allow you to get away with it any longer. We are through with all of you — both Republican and Democrat — treating us as though we were simply a natural resource to be mined for whatever purpose strikes your fancy. We are finished with letting you push us around. The jig is up.

    The American people have sent you a clear message demanding that, as our representatives, you restore our individual rights by removing onerous regulations and legislation that interfere with our freely being able to pursue our own definition of personal happiness. On that front, you can start with the repeal of Obamacare. We also want you to balance the budget and start whittling away at the national debt, not by increasing taxes, but by drastically cutting government programs and expenditures. To perform the job delegated to you by the Constitution, you will have no need for a single pork-barrel project.

    If you continue to oppose measures to eliminate earmarks and other governmental reforms, and instead support business-as-usual, then you are painting a big red bull’s-eye on your head, and we will be gunning for you and your like-minded associated in the next, and the next, and the next election, until you have all been sent out to pasture, and replaced with those who understand the proper role of government and are prepared to stand up and defend the principles upon which this country was founded.

    It’s time to choose your side, for we are engaged in a revolutionary war to take back our rights to life, liberty and property from those who wish to rule as our masters. Are you with us or against us? Please write back and let me know where you stand.

    Sincerely,

    C. Jeffery Small

    P.S. We are not the idiots you take us for — and we have long memories. I’m watching.

I would encourage each of you reading this to jot down your own thoughts on the issue and send them to any member of Congress needing a little help in understanding what it means to be a proper representative of we the people! You can use the Congress Merge site to obtain the contact information for any Senator or Representative. Thanks for continuing to do your part in the battle to restore Liberty.

Follow Through by Cole Hunter

I have always been a proud American. Now for the first time in my adult life, I have really seen and understood the true beauty of the American political system in action.  Our country is not perfect.  Some say it is broken.  Yet this nation is far from dead and it is now beginning to heal itself.  This midterm election has proven that without question.  In 2008 Americans reached out for hope and change, blindly grabbing for a lifeline.  As a country we had lost focus, became complacent, and sought out a quick fix for deeper problems.  It didn’t take long to realize we were holding a basket of snakes, not solutions.

The supporters of the Left will deny until they are blue in the face that this was a referendum on President Obama’s political agenda.   The President himself will say that our votes were cast in fear, or anger, or because we still just don’t understand.  But we do understand.   We have had over 200 years to read our Constitution, and we understand it quite well.  It is elegant, concise, and strong.  And by the overwhelming voice of the American people, we are calling for our government to return to a similar state – elegant, concise, and strong.

At the end of this election, our nation will be at a new beginning.  This election was a vital win, but we are far from finished.  There will be more elections.  There will be more tough choices.  It is now our responsibility to follow through.  We must continue to be there so that we may be heard.

This article was written for Anystreet by Cole Hunter, our newest member of  Liberatchik

TEA PARTIES STAND WITH JODY HICE

I will have my own post soon expressing why I personally support Jody Hice for Congress. For now, you can read what the Tea Party has to say about him below.

Friday, August 6th at 6:30 PM
Downtown Lawrenceville at the Old Court House and Square
Join Us As We Rally With Dr. Jody Hice to Send A True
Constitutionalist to Washington.
We Remain Loyal to:
Limited Government | Fiscal Responsibility | Free Markets
For additional information please contact John Sauers: (678) 777-8836

Host Committee comprised of members of the Atlanta Tea Party, Barrow County Tea Party, Four Corners Tea Party, Gwinnett Tea Party, Newton County Tea Party, and Walton County Tea Party Patriots


ATLANTA TEA PARTY ENDORSES JODY HICE

Suwanne, GA – Atlanta Tea Party organizers have announced the organization will endorse Jody Hice for United States Congress 7th District to replace retiring Congressman John Linder.

“We are pleased to endorse Jody Hice for Congress”, said Atlanta Tea Party organizer Julianne Thompson. She continued, “We congratulate both Jody Hice and Rob Woodall for making the run-off. Both are good and honorable men and we congratulate them on their individual accomplishments. This decision was very important to us, so we interviewed both candidates twice, and put forth a pledge for Congressional candidates to sign. Dr. Hice was the candidate who signed the pledge without hesitation and has vowed to oppose earmarks, fight for tax reform, and fight for our core values of fiscal responsibility, Constitutionally limited government, and free markets. We feel very confident he will represent the district as a citizen legislator. We feel it is time for a strong new voice in Washington, D.C.”

Atlanta Tea Party co-organizer Debbie Dooley added, “Citizens around the country share a common belief that it is time for business as usual to end in Washington. Jody Hice is strong on the issues and we feel confident he will fight for Georgians and will put his efforts toward reducing government spending and tax reform.”

For more information contact Julianne Thompson at 404-798-4663.

###

Dr. Jody Hice is the only candidate that has signed both the Atlanta Tea Party Pledge and the  Americans for Tax Reform Pledge. 95% of Republican Congressmen nationwide have signed the Americans for Tax Reform Pledge, including Congressman John Linder.

We need bold, fresh leadership like Dr. Hice to represent us in Congress.

Adam Radman  with Americans for Tax Reform wrote:
The Taxpayer Protection Pledge is a tool used to promote revenue neutral tax refor
m and fight against tax increases. Lowering the rate AND broadening the base is perfectly acceptable under the Pledge. If Rob Woodall would like to eliminate any deduction or credit, he is free to do so as long as he offsets that elimination of a deduction or credit by lowering the rates. What Woodall said in his release last week is that he is absolutely fine with eliminating a deduction or credit without lowering the rates. That is a tax increase no matter how you spin it.

Also, the Pledge does not prohibit any type of tax reform. In fact, the FAIR Tax and/or the Flat Tax are completely compliant with the Pledge as long as they do not increase revenue to the federal government.

Over 95% of House Republicans including Rep. Tom Price, Rep. Tom Graves, Rep. Paul Broun, Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, Rep. Phil Gingrey, and Rep. Linder have all signed the Pledge.

Additionally, the Pledge is not made to Americans for Tax Reform. The Pledge is made between a candidate and his constituents. The only role that Americans for Tax Reform has in the process is to monitor Pledge takers and notify their constituents if a signer has violated his/her Pledge.

The Pledge is an additional layer of accountability. At a time when Gallup finds that dissatisfaction with politicians/government as the number three issue behind the economy and jobs, people should appreciate the level of accountability Jody Hice is subjecting himself to. George H.W. Bush’s decision to break his famous “no new taxes’ Pledge is a large reason for his loss in 1992.

Atlanta Tea Party Pledge

If elected I:

Pledge to oppose all earmarks.

Pledge not to vote for any bill that intrudes on the authority of the state governments and recognize the fundamental principles that powers not enumerated in the Constitution belong to the states.

Pledge to support legislation that promotes State’s rights.

Pledge to vote to repeal the OMNIBUS Health Care bill and vote to implement free market, patient centered solutions to our healthcare system.

Pledge to vote against Cap and Trade.

Pledge to vote against any new tax increases.

Pledge to vote against the Fairness Doctrine.

Pledge to support FairTax legislation or other tax reform bills that simplify the tax code.

Pledge to vote to make permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, and making permanent the AMT “patch”.

Pledge to vote to cut the corporate income tax rate to encourage investment and job creation in the United States.

We agree that the mandatory use of E-Verify by all employers in the United States, along with “attrition through enforcement” policies that promote disciplined and constitutionally compliant enforcement of our federal immigration laws deters unauthorized entrants and the flow of contraband to our country.

We agree that rewarding those who violate our immigration laws undermines the credibility of immigration enforcement, so we pledge to vote to uphold federal law and oppose amnesty programs for illegal aliens. We also pledge to vote to institute strict penalties for employers that knowingly hire illegal aliens. We pledge to vote to secure our borders as a pre-requisite to immigration reform and vote to only allow government benefits to legal residents.

Sincerely,
Debbie Dooley