New Mexico Law and Local Sheriff Trump the Feds by Cassandra Anderson New Mexico just proved that State law trumps unconstitutional federal regulations and that the power of the sheriff is superior over federal agencies. This is the power of the Tenth Amendment! Ten years ago, when Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson was Governor of New Mexico, he signed into law a bill authorizing New Mexico to cut trees and thin overgrown forests that can prevent uncontrollable wildfires. This law applies to federal lands when federal agencies neglect or mismanage forests and put lives at risk. The US Forest Service, under the USDA, allowed the Lincoln National Forest in Otero County to become dense and overgrown and it was a life-threatening hazard. The agency refused to remediate the problem. Federal agencies are party to a sinister plot for total control and depopulation through the United Nations, called Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. Many federal employees who enforce bad environmental policies may not realize they are really enforcing UN Agenda 21. Part of this plot is the Wildlands Project designed to remove humans from rural lands and allowing forests to grow out of control, even when forest fires threaten human life. Another example of the expansion of the Wildlands Project is road closures on federal land in order to declare the area a wilderness area and off-limits to humans. According to the 1964 Wilderness Act (PL88-577), no land can be designated a Wilderness area unless it is “roadless.� Wildlands Project video below http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVTGK1uYqJo Otero County decided to put the State law to thin out the forests to the test and notified the feds. The US Forest Service threatened to ARREST Congressman Steve Pearce and Otero County Commissioners! Otero County Sheriff Benny House reportedly advised the feds that if they made any arrests, he would then arrest the feds on kidnapping charges.
On September 17th, keeping his Oath of Office to the Constitution and the People, Sheriff Benny House and his SWAT Team protected the tree cutters. The feds backed down! The feds were absent from the Tree Party Rebellion. This is because within the county, the sheriff is the highest law enforcement authority in the land. Cheers, New Mexico!! The model that New Mexico and Sheriff House established can be replicated in other states when the feds overreach their authority. Source article by Marita Noon: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/maritanoon/2011/09/18/a_tree_party_rebellion/page/full/ Photos: http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2011/09/otero-county-tree-party-defies-feds.html For more information about UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development, please visit MorphCity.com. (Author’s note: President Clinton’s President’s Council on Sustainable Development shows that executive federal government agencies have been tainted with UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development: http://clinton2.nara.gov/PCSD/Members/ and that population “stabilization” or control is a government goal: http://clinton2.nara.gov/PCSD/Overview/index.html)
CNBC Cans Debate Poll Because Ron Paul Was Leading Steve Watson Infowars.com November 10, 2011 CNBC pulled an online poll 25 minutes after last night’s GOP debate, reasoning that “one candidate” was leading by a large margin – that candidate was, of course, Ron Paul. As the following video shows, Ron Paul was ahead of the pack by a large margin, before the poll was unceremoniously pulled from the CNBC site altogether and replaced with a generic article titled “Who won the debate – Attendees weigh in”: 2011 CNBC PRESDENTIAL POLL DEBATE WINNER RON PAUL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRTKc5bLd Eo CNBC Managing Editor Allen Wastler issued the 1. following statement explaining the reason the poll was removed: Gamed Poll…So We Took It Down We had a poll up from our Republican Presidential Debate asking readers who they thought won. One candidate was leading by such a margin that it became obvious the polling wasn’t so much a reading of our audience, but of the Internet prowess of this particular candidate’s political organization. We have therefore taken the poll down. Yes, we’ve gone through this exercise before. Wastler included a link to a previous statement from 2007, where exactly the same thing happened. In an “open letter to the Ron Paul faithful”, Wastler sardonically exclaimed “Congratulations. You folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can’t help but admire that” “But you also ruined the purpose of the poll. It was no longer an honest “show of hands” — it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum.”
Wastler added. Of course, CNBC provides no actual proof that the latest poll was “gamed”. Any serious online poll restricts voting to one per IP address. Waslter bemoans the fact that Paul’s online supporters came in droves to vote, yet he does not consider why supporters of the other candidates did not do the same. Brandon Smith of Alt-Market has a great commentary piece on the pulled poll, wherein he points out that punishing Ron Paul and his supporters for being highly motivated is asinine: “What margin of success does CNBC consider “realistic” for a presidential candidate?” Smith writes. “I mean, is it really necessary for you to punish Ron Paul for being a popular candidate, or to punish his supporters for being well organized and showing up for the vote? Do you not see the half-assed absurdity of your claim that Ron Paul won by “too much”?” As we have previously documented, it seems that a poll is only deemed legitimate by the mainstream media if Ron Paul doesn’t win it. If Paul is successful, the poll is automatically considered null and void. This is to be expected given the fact that there is an admitted media talking point to ignore Ron Paul’s campaign and try and write him off entirely. The mainstream media sponsored debates are a prime example. A University of Minnesota study recently confirmed the fact that Ron Paul has been given the least time to speak OUT OF ALL THE CANDIDATES at the debates, despite national polls consistently proving he is a genuine top tier candidate. When Paul is given the opportunity to speak, he is faced with questions that directly insinuate his ideas are practically insane. As Jack Hunter points out, during last night’s CNBC debate, the station flashed up a graphic indicating that tuition prices have gone up nearly 500% since the inception of student loans and American student debt is now $1 trillion. The anchors then proceeded to grill Paul on his plans to phase out the Federal government’s involvement in student loans, as
if he were crazy to suggest the system was failing! Paul was even interrupted mid-speech by one anchor asking him “how are students going to pay for education”, to which the Congressman shot back “The same way you pay for computers and cell phones.”, explaining that having a market place with healthy competition will naturally bring costs down and improve quality. Watch the video (specific section at 7 mins): CNBC Debate - Ron Paul Highlights 11/9/2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znigu8_crM It is quite clear that Ron Paul is maintaining a top tier status IN SPITE OF the mainstream media’s best efforts to derail his campaign. With the first caucuses impending, Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton said Wednesday that the Congressman must finish in the top three in Iowa and New Hampshire in order to maintain a strong position: “We need to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire, because it’s very important for perception,” Benton told POLITICO after the Michigan GOP debate. “It’s also important because the voters in those states are very adept and astute at evaluating candidates, so we need to be in the top three in those states, no question about it.” He continued: “But we’re setting up organizations in caucus states across the country and we have a real plan to win the delegates necessary to be the Republican nominee. I don’t think anyone, outside of perhaps Mitt Romney, can say that.” GOP leaders in Iowa share Benton’s view that Ron Paul is the only other candidate aside from Romney with a strong enough core of supporters to carry him through the caucuses. But hey, according to CNBC and the rest of the mainstream media frothbots, having dedicated and organized supporters renders a candidate unworthy to be even considered for the nomination. —————————————————————— Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.
Progressives Want Ron Paul to Apologize for Calling Obama Elected Dictator Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com November 10, 2011 Democrats, led by the “progressive” TPM online magazine, are calling for Ron Paul to apologize for living in a reality-based world. TPM is tiffed because Paul described Obama as an elected dictator (see video below). TPM’s Josh Petri expects Ron Paul to follow in the footsteps of Rep. Denny Rehberg. The Montana Republican was lambasted for showing off a cartoon depicting Obama as the murdered former leader of Libya, Muammar Gaddafi. “Rehberg was quick to offer an apology. Paul, however, is not expected to apologize for anything,” writes Petri. Ron Paul has not compared Obama to Gaddafi. He simply pointed out the fact Obama has violated the Constitution by issuing executive orders that bypass Congress and the American people. “The idea they can just do this and take over the legislative function and brag about it – and Congress does nothing and the courts do nothing about it, it’s very, very bad,” Paul told Fox News. In October, Obama said “we can’t wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job. Where they won’t act, I will.” He said that he has looked at ways to violate the
Constitution “every single day” and promised to issue “executive actions on a regular basis.” Both Democrats and Republicans love to violate the Constitution. Bush ruled by executive fiat too, but Obama has taken the practice to a new level. Serious constitutional violations through executive orders began in earnest when FDR was in office. He said that “the normal balance of Executive and legislative authority may be wholly adequate to meet the unprecedented task before us” and called for a “temporary departure from that normal balance of public procedure.” FDR asked Congress to approve of his violation of the Constitution. “I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis – broad Executive power,” FDR said. Obama has not asked for permission from a usually compliant Congress. He has dismissed Congress and the American people as “dysfunctional” and has promised to act like a dictator. TPM is either unable to see this or is making excuses for Obama. It’s OK when Democrats stomp on the Constitution, but a crime when Republicans do it. Thankfully, Ron Paul will not be following in the shoes of the spineless Denny Rehberg.
Ron Paul on Obama's "Elective Dictatorship" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-h4S 8jO-1w
NOBAMA 2012
Mainstream Economists: Ron Paul Is ‘Dangerous’ Bill Anderson 1. LRC Blog November 10, 2011 To get a sense of just how intellectually and morally bankrupt mainstream academic economics has become, this article tells all, however unknowingly, since the author believes the quoted economists are correct: Another professor who teaches at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Michael Salemi, was able to identify statements from six candidates that “would earn failing grades in my Econ 101 class.” Salemi called Ron Paul’s rationale for returning to the gold standard “one of the most dangerous ideas put forward by a politician in recent years.” (emphasis mine) All in all, the economists quote the Keynesian line as though it were Absolute Truth. One professor, for example, actually believes that Obama’s “green energy” proposals are sound (although he admits they won’t make for a good “jobs program.”) As one who has taught college economics for nearly 25 years, I can say that the mainstream approach is so preposterous and so skewed that it is unsalvageable. The college texts so revered in this article teach that competition is based upon homogeneity and any time there are similar but somewhat heterogeneous goods sold, that situation is a “market failure” that needs to be “corrected” by government. Furthermore, we are supposed to believe that there is no need for entrepreneurs, as government regulators are blessed with perfect information and always can arrive at “optimal solutions,” as long as they seek the help of academic economists. And notice the absolute reverence these people have for the Federal Reserve System. Yeah, it is quite rich to see clueless academic economists accusing Ron Paul of being “dangerous” because he wants sound money.