“Is this, Sir, consistent with the character of a free Government? Is this civil liberty? Is this the real character of our Constitution? No, Sir, indeed it is not. The Constitution is libeled, foully libeled. The people of this country have not established for themselves such a fabric of despotism. They have not purchased at a vast expense of their own treasure and their own blood a Magna Carta to be slaves. Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents, and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war, in which the folly or the wickedness of Government may engage it? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest rights of personal liberty? Sir, I almost disdain to go to quotations and references to prove that such an abominable doctrine has no foundation in the Constitution of the country. It is enough to know that that instrument was intended as the basis of a free Government, and that the power contended for is incompatible with any notion of personal liberty. An attempt to maintain this doctrine upon the provisions of the Constitution is an exercise of perverse ingenuity to extract slavery from the substance of a free Government. It is an attempt to show, by proof and argument, that we ourselves are subjects of despotism, and that we have a right to chains and bondage, firmly secured to us and our children, by the provisions of our Government.

The supporters of the measures before us act on the principle that it is their task to raise arbitrary powers, by construction, out of a plain written charter of National Liberty. It is their pleasing duty to free us of the delusion, which we have fondly cherished, that we are the subjects of a mild, free and limited Government, and to demonstrate by a regular chain of premises and conclusions, that Government possesses over us a power more tyrannical, more arbitrary, more dangerous, more allied to blood and murder, more full of every form of mischief, more productive of every sort and degree of misery, than has been exercised by any civilized Government in modern times.” ~ Daniel Webster; December 9, 1814. (Full speech)

"Regulating speech is a dangerous notion, and not compatible with the principles of a free society." ~ Ron Paul

The First Amendment is not there to protect our ability to broadcast weather reports or follow our favorite celebrities. Popular and uncontroversial speech doesn’t need protection. A free society that upholds the inherent human right to free speech will be all the stronger because of it. Only a weak society would feel the need to censor, control, and limit certain expressions of speech. The stronger the society, the more free speech will be protected and upheld; free speech and the free flow of ideas and information will strengthen a free society. The weaker the society, the more free speech will be called “radical” and “dangerous.”

This is why Ron Paul was the only presidential candidate to take a public stand against SOPA and PIPA, two bills circulating through the House and Senate that would essentially give the government the ability to censor certain websites and content in the name of protecting corporate intellectual property.

"My campaign, and the entire freedom movement, would not be as strong as they are today without a free Internet." ~ Ron Paul

“My campaign, and the entire freedom movement, would not be as strong as they are today without a free Internet, and that’s just one of the reasons why the establishment hopes to censor it with SOPA and PIPA. I’m proud to see so many taking a stand today.” ~ Ron Paul

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErAXHyxlrd0[/youtube]

Senator Rand Paul stopped by Ron Paul’s New Hampshire Headquarters today, January 7, to meet with the volunteers. Rand has been traveling around the state to promote his father and raise awareness of the campaign.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U_xHwXNiek[/youtube]

“[T]he same act undertaking to authorize the President to remove a person out of the United States who is under the protection of the Law, on his own suspicion, without accusation, without jury, without public trial, without confrontation of the witnesses against him, without having witnesses in his favour, without defence, without counsel, is contrary to these provisions also of the Constitution, is therefore not law but utterly void and of no force.”

~ Thomas Jefferson; Resolutions Adopted by the Kentucky General Assembly; November 10, 1798

This quote should be sent to every single politician (including President Obama) who thinks indefinitely detaining U.S. citizens is somehow a potential solution in the fight against “terrorism.” Our liberty is being taken by our own government, not far-off “terrorists” in the Middle East. Let’s listen to Thomas Jefferson and respect the rule of law.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaQY1j-o__I[/youtube]

So much for the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution which explicitly states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.” 

What’s disturbing is Obama’s justification of signing this dreadful legislation into law:

“The White House announced today that President Obama will sign a once-disputed defense authorization bill because authors have removed language that would have restricted the administration’s handling of high-value terrorist detainees.” — USA Today; December 14, 2011

The purpose of the Fifth Amendment and the Constitution is not to protect the guilty, it is to protect the innocent. The fact that this was not the prime concern of the Obama Administration, or the majority of legislators in the House and Senate, is extremely frightening.

All lawmakers take an oath to uphold the Constitution. They don’t take an oath to fight terrorists, they don’t take an oath to increase military spending, and they certainly don’t take an oath eliminate liberty in the name of security; they only take an oath to uphold the Constitution. It is shameful that the American people let lawmakers and presidents legislate their human rights and liberties away in the name of protecting a false sense of security.

This legislation passed with a 93-7 margin in the Senate, with Senator Rand Paul staunchly opposing the bill. In the House, a 283-186 vote allowed a passage of the bill. Congressmen Ron Paul and Justin Amash were among the minority strongly against the legislation. Ron Paul described the bill as “arrogant and bold and dangerous.“

The police state is quickly expanding in the U.S. Obama is simply amplifying the horrendous legislation (such as the PATRIOT Act) that was signed into law under George W. Bush. If we are to protect our God-given liberties, I submit that there is only one man running for president worthy of our support. Watch this video to understand why:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ9bmNIkFtY[/youtube]

“The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home.” ~ James Madison

Resist the police state; RSVP for the December 16 Tea Party Money Bomb at TeaParty11.com.

For those wondering, this is regarding the real Tea Party movement inspired by Ron Paul’s presidential bid in 2007. This has no connection to the phony “Tea Party” movement that was hijacked by the GOP and made a largely anti-Obama campaign.

My name is David Kretzmann. I am a 19 year old student at Berea College in Kentucky; I’ve lived in Kentucky since August of 2010. Today I urgently write you to investigate the death of Abdulrahman Al-awlaki.

Within the past 45 days, three U.S. citizens have been killed at the hand of U.S. drone attacks in Yemen. The most well known of these incidents was the case of Anwar Alawlaki, the U.S. citizen born in New Mexico suspected (but never officially charged) of working with Al-Qaeda. Alawlaki was on the CIA’s public hit list, signed off by President Barack Obama, for 17 months prior to his assassination on September 30, 2011. Alawlaki’s constitutional rights as a U.S. citizen were ignored by the Obama administration, despite attempts from Alawlaki’s father and the ACLU to protect Alawlaki.

What’s even more disturbing than Alawlaki’s assassination is the death of his 16 year old son, Abdulrahman Al-awlaki, just two weeks later on October 14, 2011. Abdulrahman Al-awlaki was having a Friday night barbecue with his cousin and fellow teenage friends. A U.S. drone strike took their lives that night.

Abdulrahman Al-awlaki was born in Denver, Colorado, in 1995. He was an American citizen and just 16 years old. He was no less a U.S. citizen than you and I. He had no ties whatsoever to Al-Qaeda or any other militant group.

The Obama administration has been eerily silent on this matter, not so much as acknowledging that a U.S. drone strike killed a 16 year old American citizen. This is the primary reason I am writing you this letter. We need to know why Abdulrahman Al-alwaki was killed; whether it was an intentional killing (i.e. assassination), casualty of war, or a tragic misfire incident.

On November 2, 2011, hundreds of Yemeni individuals peacefully came together to protest U.S. drone attacks in Yemen. I highly encourage you to observe some of the pictures and footage that came out of this event; it is remarkable seeing these people come together to bring about a change in their country. Innocent civilians, including children and teenagers, are losing their lives in Yemen because of U.S. drone strikes. This is the heartbreaking reality for a growing number of families in Yemen, and demonstrates the urgency of the plea I bring to you today.

I know that you can, above anyone else in the Senate, bring about an investigation of Abdulrahman Al-awlaki’s death. You have proven yourself to be a principled voice of liberty, reason, and the rule of law in the U.S. Senate, and there is no one I would trust more to spearhead an investigation. At the very least, people deserve to know why their tax dollars are going to war efforts that have now taken the life of an innocent American teenager.

Please consider sharing this information with your colleagues in the Senate as well as your constituents in Kentucky. If nothing else, you can raise awareness of this incident. This should be a nationwide discussion of what Americans are willing to allow their government to do in these ongoing wars.

I write you today not for my own well being. I am doing fine here in Kentucky. But it hit me hard when I learned of Abdulrahman’s needless death. We are talking about an innocent American teenage citizen whose death has been callously ignored by our President. I am writing this for the people in Yemen who have nowhere else to turn.

Al-awlaki’s family is currently promoting a petition calling for an investigation of Abdulrahman’s death. As of this writing, 334 letters and petitions have been sent to Congress.

Let us not forget the words of President Obama:

“My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.”

Please work to hold the President to his word. The American people deserve to know the truth about these matters, especially when one of their own is taken in the line of war. I believe an investigation would mean much to Abdulrahman’s family, the people of Yemen, and your constituents who are paying for these war endeavors.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do personally to help you with this process.

Thank you for your commitment to life, liberty, and the rule of law. I am proud to call you my representative, and I look forward to the progress we can reach on this vital issue.

For Life, Liberty, and Justice,

David Kretzmann

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9JShHvPdFw[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM_sef3tYuo[/youtube]

President Obama signed the bill just before midnight, breaking a campaign promise that security would be enforced “without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.” The Detroit Free Press reports:

Congress passed a four-year extension Thursday of post-9/11 powers to search records and conduct roving wiretaps in pursuit of terrorists. Votes in the Senate and House came after lawmakers rejected attempts to temper the law enforcement powers to ensure that individual liberties are not abused.

Minutes before the midnight deadline, the White House said Obama had signed the bill.

Clearly, this is change we can believe in.

A piece of Rand Paul’s heroics standing up to Senator Harry Reid:

Check off another campaign promise broken by Obama, props to Rand Paul for resisting the renewal of the PATRIOT Act, and mark down continued disregard for the Constitution.

This video is a couple weeks old, but it is absolutely magnificent. Rand Paul demolishes a bureaucrat and masterfully outlines why bureaucratic red tape restricts freedom and hurts individuals. Beautiful.