Dear State Lawmaker,
During the past several months I have attended a few of the hearings held in the capitol as one committee after another sat in judgement of my rights as an American citizen and debated as to what extent they would unconstitutionally infringe on the Bill of Rights.

During those hearings I sat quietly in the crowd or reviewed video records after the fact.  I listened as great patriots and Americans testified, provided anecdotal apologues, and proffered  irrefutable statistics  and data in support of the 2nd Amendment.

The testimony was heartfelt and delivered with variations of justifiable anger and some with more stoic thoughtfulness.  But regardless of the content or the manner in which it was presented, one thing is perfectly clear.  Not one of you who voted to pass yet more unconstitutional law, ever intended to listen, comprehend or consider one word of testimony.

In fact on a few occasions, the legislators who work for we the people, in blatant displays of arrogance, held side conversations during statements from the citizens.  And at one hearing it was announced that the committee would vote on the new legislation, before hearing from the people.

So I had to ask myself......., If these people can hear, read about and then truly analyze all the statistics which prove, beyond any doubt that America is safer in places where the 2nd Amendment has not been violated, and know of all the writings and beliefs of our Founding Fathers relating to the right of every law abiding citizen to protect himself and others, and then ignore it all and vote to further endanger me and my family....... are they letting a leftist ideology dictate how they will vote, as opposed to how they should vote?

Asking myself that question could never get an answer, since it requires your input, so I decided to go straight to you, the lawmaker and ask you one simple question.  The answer does not require a long dissertation nor do I want one.  The question is simple and so should the answer be. It requires, a  YES or NO.

Before I ask it, its important to know, the following scenario is not likely to happen to you or your family members, however, it does indeed happen.  And even if not to you, it does and will happen to those you propose to legislate for.  This is a certainty even if you are given the authority to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate. Please be consious not only of your family as you read and answer this question, but also those who will, someday be faced with survival of this or a lessor magnitude.


Mr./Mrs. Legislator, before I ask my question I would like to tell you about myself because it is pertinent to it.  I have raised a family, lived in this state my entire life, started and ran a construction company which employed many people.  I have never been investigated, charged or arrested for anything nor have I in fact, ever broken any law.  And I have not had even a driving ticket for over 35 years.  I was drafted and served honorably in the US Army.  I am a member of the NRA and a very prestigious Rifle Club.  I have had training in safety and can use many types of weapons.  While I'm not close to being a world class shooter, I do hit any target within 50 yards, every time. 

As you answer this question, keep in mind, the laws you will or have voted on prevent me from ever having my weapon with me, anywhere except the shooting range or my home.  Laws by the way, which have zero effect on criminals.

The Question:
If you, or one or more of your family members, found themselves trapped in a building or location where one or more terrorists or deranged mass murderers were in the process of methodically killing everyone, would you like to know that I was in that location and had my 9mm Glock, locked and loaded with a 15 round magazine, un-holstered and with the safety off?

I would appreciate, no matter how you voted on these new gun laws, if you would return this email with your YES or No answer.  

Finally, I am taking the time to send this to each of you individually.  How many of you will have the courage to admit you would sacrifice the innocent lives of your loved ones in support of a leftist ideology?  I'll bet, I won't hear from even one of you and I'll also bet, not one of you who would vote no to this question will inform your family of that.


Sincerely,
Dwight Kehoe
May 14, 2013
TPATH

By Nora Craig



Dear Democratic Senators,
(who orchestrated the latest dog and pony show in Trenton)
CC:  Governor Christie
May 5, 2013


What Upset Me Most About the NJ Senate Hearings on Gun Control Bills.
Shame on you.
Nora Craig 


May 5, 2013 TPATH

April 12, 2013 TPATH

Dear Senator Toomey,
First, thank you for posting the proposed "Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act" on your website.  Being able to read the entire bill helps in the understanding of its implications.  TPATH has spent a great amount of time reading it and reverting back and forth between the many titles and sections of existing law that this legislation would implicate.

Read the full bill here: http://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=968

Being relatively sure that you have not seen the proposed legislation that TPATH has put out several weeks ago, please check out this link where you can view or download our proposed bill, which of course was not produced with all the bells and whistles required for actual argument or discussion, but as a guideline for what we think this legislation should entail.

See or download it here - http://www.tpath.org/TPATH_UPDATE_LINKS.html#CNPL_Program

While there are many similarities between our proposals, the most important point of agreement is that the proposed database will not contain names or information on legal and lawful gun owners.  It will contain just names and information on those who are not legally eligible or mentally competent to purchase or own firearms.

Senator Toomey, there is no doubt that you have been under great pressure from conservatives and more than likely you are taking some pretty heavy political hits.  Sometimes that is the price one pays for stepping up to the plate.  Understanding that this is an extremely important issue, it is imperative that our 2nd Amendment rights be preserved, and too, is important we do all we can, to protect society from criminals.

It is a daunting task to try and juggle these two concepts without infringing on both. And it is just as impossible to create a perfectly safe society as it is to prevent firearms from getting into the wrong hands.  Progressives and the left, have proven over and over again that they can not be trusted to do anything except the wrong thing.  Despite all their rhetoric to the contrary, they would like nothing better than to eradicate the 2nd Amendment.  Though we must work with them, we cannot join with them or aide them in that endeavor.

Having said that, I was unexpectedly satisfied that your bill had the correct words and support for the Constitution and the specific requirement for the "Registry" to contain only the names of criminals and not law abiding citizens who have bought or who may be considering buying guns.

But, there appears to be a few items of omission and one glaring section which needs to be removed.  TPATH is ready to support your bill if the following adjustments are made:

1. It should be made clear that no record of lawful purchases or the the purchaser's name will be compiled or saved in any Federal database as a result of a background check or any other means.  Only those names of persons attempting to buy a weapon and who are on the no purchase list will be saved. 

2. It should be a crime to try to purchase a weapon if the purchaser is on this list.  And that person should be prosecuted without exception.

3. There should be a means for a purchaser to check the system, without penalty, to see if he is clear to purchase firearms.  That step will not be an authorization to purchase and no record will be kept for that search.

4. Section 128: INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION OF FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION should be deleted completely.  This is a blatant infringement on the 2nd Amendment.  Once a citizen has been proven not to be on  the no purchase list, the Federal Government should have no further ability to infringe on his rights to transport, move or ship his property.  This is also an infringement on State's Rights which already have laws concerning those being suggested under Section 128.

5. While the legislation TPATH proposed did not require the States to join this effort at producing and maintaining a "no purchase list", it is understood that for this to be practicable and to some extent effective, complete participation is necessary.  So the deduction of certain payments to the state for non compliance or participation is acceptable.

6. There needs to be a very strict penalty for anyone who attempts to purchase weapons after knowing they are on the no purchase list.  These penalties need to be mandatory and not plea bargain-able.

7. A new section must be added that prohibits the plea bargaining away of gun violation laws for persons who have committed crimes with weapons.  Too often, criminals are allowed to walk away from gun law violations if they plead guilty to the crimes they commit with them.  This must stop.  If we really want gun violence to stop, keep violators in prison.

Please take some time to consider these ideas.  2nd Amendment supporters across this country will work with you or any politician if they can be reasonably secure in knowing public safety is the issue and not destruction of the Bill of Rights.

Sincerely,
Dwight Kehoe
www.tpath.org

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:28 PM, <liked26786@mypacks.net> wrote:

Dear Dwight,

Thank you for talking about the eligibility issue.  I find it extraordinary that our judges and our congressional representatives who can actually advance the issue will not even examine the evidence!   It is indeed difficult to bring down a notorious Mafia family.  Its members kill and maim and confiscate, threaten and belittle.  Only the most courageous souls, the best among us, are willing to stand up to them.

Where is (former Congressman) Jim Rogan?  We need him.  Here's an excerpt from his talk on C-Span as he was promoting his book Catching Our Flag, written based on his diary notes during Clinton's impeachment:
 

“… The president ended up being impeached and we were over at the Senate and to say that we were unwanted when we got there would be a euphemism.  And it was a bipartisan lack of appreciation for our presence. 

 We were told very early on… in fact Trent Lot, the Republican leader, told me very early on:  “I don’t care if you have pictures of this guy standing over a dead woman with a smoking gun in his hands.  America did not want him impeached.  You guys jumped off a cliff.  You just lost your majority.  I have 55 Republican senators, seven of them are up for reelection next year in tough races.  We’re protecting our majority.  We’re going to be the adults, you are going to be the children.  We don’t care if it’s about perjury, obstruction of justice, any of those things.  We’re going to take care of business.” 

 So that was the welcome we got.….. 

 We went through the trial.  We knew it was a losing proposition.  Why impeach a president when 75% of the American people are opposed to it?  If you think about it now in more historical terms, I think it’s an incredibly interesting dynamic because you had in this window period politicians who are genetically hard-wired not to do anything unpopular, not to do anything to rock the boat, not to make the voters angry at them – suddenly went from a position of wanting to protect themselves to realizing there was an important principle of law that required defending.  And it had nothing to do with the President’s personal life.  It’s a fascinating story.  And this book chronicles it day by day - how slowly this all changed, how this dynamic changed….

 The ultimate question is: why do it?  Why did I give up my seat in Congress? It took me 30 years to get there.  Why was I willing to cast a vote and participate in something that I knew from the start was a loser? 

 This is why:  When the Founders wrote the Constitution they said the president can be removed for high crimes and misdemeanors, but they never defined what is a high crime and misdemeanor.  So where do we get the definition?  The definition comes from every single impeachment the House faces.  We had 17 or 18 of them.  I think we had 17 by the time President Clinton came to office.  Mostly federal judges. 

 A federal judge or officer is charged with something wrong, there’s a vote on whether to impeach him.  And that becomes the standard.  The precedent of what is and is not an impeachable offense. 

 The evidence isn’t even controverted anymore that President Clinton committed perjury.  In fact, you will recall he cut a plea-bargain… maybe you don’t recall because the press doesn’t talk about it very much.  In his last day in office, after he denied all this stuff vehemently in attacking us daily to avoid being federally prosecuted, on his last day in office he signed a plea-bargain with federal prosecutors and admitted that he lied under oath and he admitted the things that we charged him with. 

 If we had not voted to impeach President Clinton we would have set a standard for every future president that perjury, subornation of perjury, obstruction of justice - it may be terrible, it may be tacky, maybe you can prosecute the guy for… later - but it is not a removable offense.  And, my friends, let me tell you, democrat, republican, independent: you do not want to live in a country where the president of the United States feels he can commit perjury or obstruct justice and not think it is anything more than a one-way exit ticket from the White House.  And that will always be the standard based on the Clinton precedent as long as members of Congress have the spine to stand up to them. 

 When I gave the closing argument in the Senate trial I told the senators:  This is not personal to me.  In fact, President Clinton and I always had a kind of a soft spot for him, he was very charming to me, I first met him when I was in college and he was the Attorney General of Arkansas.  This is a bigger issue and I know that by being a part of it I’m not coming back.  I told the Senate:  I’m going to be defeated in my next campaign.  And I was. 

Thank you for your courage.

Best to you,
Robert Hamilton
California

First letter:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:08 PM, (name with held) <email.withheld@hotmail.com> wrote:

    I wish I had the time to refute what you're saying, as I said before, the BC issue is a distraction, a way to drain your resources on an issue that will not be resolved in our lifetime.
     
    Fight where you can win!  


Dear Patriot,
I am very surprised at your comment.  You of all people should understand the dire danger our country is in as a result of the Constitution being subverted.  This is not about Obama, this is not about a birth certificate.  It about people and governments that will follow if we stand down on this issue. If we are too busy to hold elected officials to the law, it won't be long before we will have much idol time to contemplate that choice.

Even if we were not capable of chewing gum and walking at the same time, which we are, protecting the Constitution, working to keep it the law of our land would be the number one battle front.

It is the Constitution, for our young 200 years, that has kept us free, kept our military from rounding us up and prevented total takeover of the people by the government.

Allowing the steady erosion of Article after Article, Amendment after Amendment, phrase after phrase, is a recipe for disaster.  I do what I do because I understand history and I understand mankind. History shows us what governments unfettered by the rule of law will and can do.  If anyone thinks the leftists running this country are any different form those of the past, that think will end up being, not a thought, but a nightmare.

No Sir, I will not stand by because I'm too busy trying to fill a legislative seat in Monroe Township, while the core of our freedom is being dismantled, continuously and relentlessly..

Finally, as I'm sure you know, the left is attacking American values on every front. From every direction.  Morally, financially and educationally.  When do you suppose they ever did, or ever will, let up on even one aspect of their destructive agenda because they need to be more focused?

Sir, while I admire you and all that you have done, on this my friend, you are wrong.  There is a very thin wall that stands between the people and tyranny.  Once I believed that wall to be of indestructible concrete and steel, but the reality is that wall is made of paper.  The pages of our Founding Documents.  The wall is coming down, one page at a time.  There is no other issue that will distract me from my efforts to fortify it.

Regards,
Dwight



`````````````````````````````
Second Letter:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:22 PM, (name with held) <emailwithheld@verizon.net> wrote:

    Don’t understand why you think Levin, Hannity  Rush et.al. can say what they say and not mean it.   How do they “profit” from their position if no one can accept it?  Where would we be if they were not out there? Why do you believe Savage who is on the same radio network? Who else will champion the cause to impeach BO? It seems we can’t get influential big names to give our cause real traction; not Trump, West etc.  If “birthers” including Beck, think BO is not a citizen, why would Beck say he “debunked” (proved wrong) them?  PS I think you meant ”decimate” the military.



Dear Patriot,
Darned spell checker snuck another one by me. Yes, of course "decimate".

Mike Savage has never belittled or ridiculed those that believe Obama is ineligible or those who are concerned about forgeries and illegal use of SS#'s.  Also, Savage was no doubt told by his last station not to talk about those issues.  He ignored them and was fired.  That's called principle over profit.

And yes, he now works for ABC, as does Hannity, Levin and Limbaugh.  By the way, so does Arron Klein. My best guess is they have signed agreements that have given them more leeway or, they refuse to abide by the restrictions.  Someday, if we live long enough, we may find out.

I'm not sure if you intended to call Beck a birther or not.  But he is not.  He has been very disrespectful and vitriolic towards those that bring up forgeries, ss# and Article II.  

And to your point of those thinking Obama is not a citizen.  Most of us don't know if he is or not, because he has spent millions to hide his past.  But what we do know is Obama's father was not a citizen and therefore, Obama is not a "Natural Born Citizen" as required by the above referenced Article II.  That is a fact.  It is also a fact that no one will talk about that, because it is the one thing that is indisputable.

Also, it is my belief, and that of many others, that Obama can not be impeached, because he is not legally in office.  He needs to be removed by the Supreme Court and every appointee, every bill he signed and every EO should be voided.  Impeachment would signify that he is there legally and then performed an impeachable offense.  He surely has committed impeachable offenses, but he is not there legally.

Of course, I'm not saying that that will ever happen.  Just that it should.

And yes, I agree that we need these guys and they are beneficial.  But is asking that they be be honest with us too much?  What is the one thing, once broken, that can never be repaired?  It is of course, one's word.  

If I can't believe everything they say, I can hardly believe anything they say.

Thanks for taking the time to give me your thoughts.  You know I always appreciate your views.

Regards,
Dwight

March 26, 2013 TPATH

 
Dwight Kehoe
297 Willow Drive,
Little Silver, NJ 07739
February 15, 2013

Dear Governor Christie,
As you are aware, the New Jersey Legislature is about to hand you a new set of laws concerning gun control and gun violence, which will be in addition to several hundred others already on the books.  I am writing you with a request to veto that entire bill.  

This request is made from the standpoint of common sense and the need to respect and abide by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, that are, as a whole and in the opinion of scholars around the world, the most important reason for the strength, the freedom and the economic power which has made this country the best and most free land mankind has ever known. 

The need to come to a decision based upon reality and common sense is imperative and it is quite clear that most of the existing gun control laws in this state are based upon neither. 

During this period of heated discussion and angry discourse, in the wake of innocent men, women and children being murdered, its understandable that there would be many people who truly and sincerely want to see it stopped and the only thing that makes sense to them is “control the guns”. 

This group of people is made up of, unfortunately, the uninformed, the uneducated and the easily manipulated. Regrettably, this aggregation of society includes State Senators and Assemblymen, those whom the people should be able to count on to do the required research and then legislate based upon not just United States law, but proper and concerted evaluation.

Getting angry is not the answer.  Education and information is.
For those of us who have taken the time to learn and appraise, it is easy to become angry with those who have not.  Especially those politicians who, by the act of running for office, profess to be informed and capable.   

Don't misunderstand, that does not discount those who disdain the Constitution, those that despise individual freedoms and abhor the rights of the people while imposing as much government control over our lives as they can get away with.  Those people are not ignorant nor uninformed.  But clearly their progressive government agenda has and will always mandate their unlawful activity.  It is everyone's responsibility to see that they do not succeed.  You, our Governor, have the power and the responsibility to help curtail those people.

Governor Christie, no doubt you have been inundated with letters, data and facts, both manipulated and accurate, and from both sides.  So I won't include here, those which you probably have seen, but will offer a few new ones that you may not know of or have considered. 

Over 50% of gun law violations committed during another felony, such as armed robbery, burglary, gang type assaults and shootings, are plea bargained away. The percentages vary across the country but here in New Jersey they appear to be higher than the national average.

The result of that?  Criminals who should be prosecuted for felonious breach of gun laws are more than likely not going to serve even one minute of time in prison for them.  Meanwhile good men and women, people who have never broken any law, sit in prison while their children grow up without them because  they may have left a round of ammunition in their rifle or stopped to get something to eat on the way to or from hunting or the range. 

Every one of New Jersey's unconstitutional gun laws are felonies.  Any violation of them by honest citizens will result in a criminal  record that will impact them, their families and their livelihoods for the rest of their lives.  This Governor, is just not right.

There are two new gun laws that I would support: 
1.No plea bargaining of gun law violations for those violating them to commit a felony and a mandatory ten years of imprisonment on top of the sentence for the crime committed with the firearm.  
2. Violations of gun laws not relating to another crime should be changed from felonies to misdemeanors or fines. 

 These two laws would get criminals off the street and keep them off, thereby making the state safer. And of course, would keep hard working, tax paying fathers and mothers home with their children. What a concept?

Governor, just one more statistic.  An American, man, woman or child, has a .000,000,003% chance of being killed, unlawfully, with a firearm.  That number includes crimes committed by gangs and drug dealers.  Those are odds anyone with an iota of common sense would gladly take to preserve our Constitution, liberty and freedom. 

For sure, if one's family members ever become part of that above statistic it would be devastating.   But so too is the misery of any death or injury whether its from car accidents, work place mishaps or even one of the tens of thousands who die each year from medical procedures.  The reality of life is that no one can ever be promised or guaranteed complete and absolute safety.  Those that profess to be able to do that are either hypocrites or fools.  Neither of which should be empowered to make laws for the rest of us.

Finally, if my rights to bear arms were not unconstitutionally erased by a ruling of the Supreme Court of New Jersey, and my rights to bear arms had not been violated, and if the time over arose, where I would be in the position to put my life on the line and put my expertise with a firearm to use in order to save innocent lives, from either a mass murderer or a psychopath, I, as well as millions of other Americans,  would not hesitate to do so.  

However, with gun laws here in New Jersey, being what they are, nothing could be done in a situation such as that.  Except hope that the killer has abided by the ammunition restrictions and limited magazine capacities, imposed by New Jersey law, and  as a consequence,  runs out of ammunition before he runs out of victims. 


Sincerely,
Dwight Kehoe
65 Years a New Jersey Resident

This letter was faxed to Governor Christie's office at  1 609-292-3454
and snail mailed to:

Office of the Governor
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625

Posted by TPATH
February 15, 2013

*****

 
February 13, 2013

The Honorable Governor Chris Christie
Office of the Governor
P.O. Box 001
Trenton, New Jersey  08625-0001
 
Dear Governor Christie,
As you may know, the NJ Tea Party Caucus is comprised of numerous NJ tea parties and like-minded organizations throughout the State of New Jersey.  As a group that believes in the principles of limited government supported in our Constitution, the 43 gun control laws being proposed are very disturbing.  We are appealing to you as someone who is known to be a man who does not shy away from making tough decisions and as one of New Jersey’s most valiant former Attorney Generals who respects the law.

Therefore, we are asking that you consider our arguments when making your decision about whether or not to veto the legislation in question.

The Ninth Circuit Court, one of the most notoriously liberal courts in the country, held in Nordyke v. King:

The right to bear arms is a bulwark against external invasion. We should not be overconfident that oceans on out east and west coasts alone can preserve security. We recently saw in the case of the terrorist attack on Mumbai that terrorist may enter a country covertly by ocean routes, landing in small craft and then assembling to wreak havoc. That we have a lawfully armed populace adds a measure of security for all of us and makes less likely that a band of terrorist could make headway in an attack on any community before more professional forces arrived.
 

The Supreme Court, in its 2008 decision in District of Columbia v Heller, established that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to own guns. In the majority opinion, Justice Anton Scalia wrote:

There are many reasons why the militia was thought to be “necessary to the security of a free state.” See 3 Story §1890. First, of course, it is useful in repelling invasions and suppressing insurrections. Second, it renders large standing armies unnecessary—an argument that Alexander Hamilton made in favor of federal control over the militia. (The Federalist No. 29, pp. 226, 227 (B. Wright ed. 1961) (A. Hamilton).) Third, when the able-bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny.


Justice Scalia went on to write:

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment ’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.


Lastly, we would like to draw your attention to the word “infringed, as written in the Second Amendment:

                    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

 
Obviously, the words “shall not” are a command not a suggestion but what exactly does the word “infringed” mean? Modern day dictionaries define the word this way:
 
Infringe – to disobey or disregard something, to fail to obey a law or regulation or observe the terms of an agreement; to encroach upon somebody’s rights or property – especially in a minor or gradual way.
 
Since the Second Amendment was written 224 years ago, a compilation of the definitions in the 1828 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language seems to be a good reference in understanding the definition of this word as it was used nearly two hundred years ago.  It is as follows:
 
To violate, hinder, destroy, transgress upon in any way, contravene, annihilate, take away, cause to cease, put an end to, extirpate, kill or slay, lay waste or make desolate, destroy the influence of, to bring to naught, to ruin, to pull down, to pass upon or limit in anyway, to disturb or to obstruct in any manner the rights of the people.
 
When considering the court precedents and the meaning of “shall not be infringed,” we propose that if the Second Amendment were written today, it would read:
 
An organized group of citizen soldiers who are not part of our Armed Forces are necessary to protecting the freedoms of their local communities and defending themselves and their families. Therefore, the right of all people to have and use firearms shall not be violated, transgressed upon, destroyed or hindered, injured or hurt, interrupted, disturbed, opposed, obstructed, defeated, surpassed, demolished, pulled down, ruined or annihilated, laid waste, made desolate, caused to cease, impeded, restrained or obstructed in any way.
 
We further urge you not to be influenced by the current tragedies we are experiencing. The laws being proposed will do nothing to allay the sociopaths who commit such violent crimes.  They will only impede our ability to defend ourselves against such sociopaths by also infringing upon our most basic inalienable right to defend ourselves and our families. As is the case in the field of medicine, it should be in the field of legislation: first - do no harm! For the same reason many in our culture elect to hire armed guards for their personal protection, it would be an unequal application of the law not to permit all citizens to do the same. Should our Second Amendment right be violated for the average citizen, then we would argue that all security guards for all politicians, celebrities, and their families also be infringed upon - equally.  Of course that may be preposterous - but at least the laws would be applied equally.  Anything else would not only be unconstitutional, it would be hypocritical. 
 
It is our great hope that our Governor will do the right thing and protect the very fabric of our system of government and the rights of our citizens, as he has taken an oath to do.  We will look forward to your reply.
 
Sincerely,
RoseAnn Salanitri /s/ 
RoseAnn Salanitri, President
The NJ Tea Party Caucus
 
The NJ Tea Party Caucus is a corporation doing business in the State of New Jersey that is comprised of numerous TEA Parties and like-minded individuals and organizations throughout the State. We speak on behalf of our participating members on a variety of issues that fall within the parameters of our Mission Statement.
www.NJTeaPartyCaucus.com

Posted for NJTPC By TPATH

****

New Jersey is facing a civil rights crisis of a magnitude not seen since the great struggle for Civil Rights by courageous leaders such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Today our sheriffs must decide whether to remain a constitutional office and a “check and balance” against an over-reaching government or go along with the President’s “disarming of America” and other attacks on our Bill of Rights.

Our Republic and our rights as citizens have endured for over 200 years but they are now being threatened with almost daily attacks on portions of our Bill of Rights - especially the 2nd Amendment. This has been tried before under President Clinton and was struck down. Yet despite that, vocal political party leaders supported by activist judges are re-interpreting our Rights to be whatever they deem them to be.

Paul Arisano of the Monmouth County Tea Party Coalition, expressed the beliefs of many when he said, "It's not just about gun rights - it's all of the sacred Bill of Rights. The first Ten Amendments when declared, were declared unalienable; never to be taken away. If you are not interested in being a gun owner, what about the rest of your rights (jury trial, illegal searches, speech, religious)?” 

Frank Cott, Chairman of the NJ Tea Party Caucus’ Sheriff’s Project said, “Much of the media and progressives are blindly supporting agendas that at one time caused mainstream Democrats grief. Good NJ Democrat veterans/voters in many cases are forced to compromise moral and constitutional beliefs and unknowingly support a socialistic agenda - the very thing that many of them fought to protect us from. We are hoping that Democrats and Republicans recognize that politicians are using party labels to advance an agenda and fool citizens into supporting them. They are employing a “mob rule” idea over an idea that has worked for over 200 years.”

“Our country was formed to be a Constitutional Republic. The Founding Fathers despised Democracy calling it ‘Mob Rule’,” said Calvin Wortman of the Constitution Party of NJ.

We believe Mr. Wortman is correct, but when you have NJ Supreme Court Justice Barry Albin citing that our Founding Fathers created a Democracy, you quickly realize that our judicial and political parties no longer operate constitutionally, thus placing all of our rights in danger.

People vote for a county sheriff because he serves the common wealth of their county and he is not a department under the freeholders, state, governor or even the feds. A sheriff cannot be limited with statutes - although some states are getting away with this. Politicians that limit the sheriff’s office are telling citizens, “YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS.” 

If a state or federal government can control a sheriff, a vital check and balance function that protects our rights is removed. Even SCOTUS agrees with the people (Printz v. U.S. 1997. See Scalia opinion). In 1996 the Clinton radicals tried to disarm us but were told it was unconstitutional (illegal or unlawful). 

It’s time to engage and make sure our legislators know
 they have no authority over the
Office of Sheriff
before we lose this protection unlawfully. 

The state of Delaware ignored its citizens’ rights and tried to redefine the sheriffs who are not following state and federal gun confiscation orders. These legislators support women and gay rights, yet ignore the Constitution that protects all citizens.iii In Delaware, it appears that Beau Biden (Vice President Joe Biden’s son) has no respect for his constituents’ rights and is unlawfully changing the state laws/constitution without citizen approval. This is a clear example of a violation of the check and balances and government abuse that reinforces the need for sheriffs and a constitutional office - not beholding to any political party or legislator.

We hope that governors, especially ours, realize that our counties along with the sheriffs are truly what keeps Americans free from abusive centralized government and ideologues.  

People need to ask their sheriff, “Will you stand with the Bill of Rights?” People need to ask their state legislators and politicians, “Will you stand with the people and their sheriffs?”


Contact: Frank Cott: 

The following groups are united in this message:
The statewide NJ Tea Party Caucus
Citizens for Freedom, 
East NJ Tea Party 
Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots  
The Monmouth County Tea Party Coalition
TPATH -Tea Party Advocacy Tracking Hub

TPATH wishes to thank all those groups listed above for their tireless and selfless efforts to save and protect our liberty.  With a very special mention of Mr. Frank Cott and RoseAnn Salinitri.

Please pass this press release on to any patriotic group or person you believe will join this effort.  If you represent a group, please feel free to ad your groups name to the list above.

Special note:  While this project is being initiated in New Jersey, this is a country wide concern and effort. For questions and more information please contact Mr. Frank  Cott   EMAIL FRANK HERE

February 6, 2013 TPATH 

********

To: The Constitution Party Leadership

November 17, 2012 TPATH
Response to a question from a great American concerning my switch from anti-third party to support for one.

Dear Pete,
Since you have known me you know I have always been staunchly against the 3rd party concept.

The reason was exactly as you stated in your remarks to me.
(See Pete's letter below)
But... election after election, candidate after candidate, the GOP presents weak and spineless people and game plans.  So the bottom line is, how could a third party do more to allow Democrats and progressives into power than the GOP has done?

Consequently, there is no end in sight of this dismal record. We the people must think of the long term future for this country and look beyond the next election cycle. 

The only thing that will wake them up is if they see their 2nd place position in the political power scheme being challenged as millions of conservative and constitutionally minded people leave the GOP. 

If Tea Party people, patriots, independents, blue collar Democrats and unaffiliated voters see a third party, whether it be in the name of the Constitution Party or some other, see a party that stands for what they believe and then stands up for those beliefs, begin to join this 3rd party, the GOP could very quickly assume that status.

The committee man thing has been a decent idea but for the most part its deeply flawed.  The leaders of the GOP party will never let town's people get control beyond a minor vote.  They will change the rules as they see, and they do see, loss of control via committee people.

We will never change the GOP from that strategy.

They must fear losing their members and thereby their power and money, more than they fear the News Media.  Right now, in the past and in the future they only fear the latter. If that does not change, they never will.

Obama is in the process of destroying this country and now seems the time to ask those who might not believe the GOP has done its best to prevent that, to begin thinking of an alternate game plan.

If your running back keeps getting tackled for no gain, and the coach keeps calling the same play, it just might be time to fire him.

Pete, its time.

Regards,
Dwight



Pete's email to TPATH

Dwight,

I agree WHOLE HEARTEDLY that the GOP sucks, however I think the real solution is to run tea party people as GOP committee people.  It is relatively easy to unseat committee people as you only really need about 20 or 30 votes.  Then we can get the candidates we want.  I really feel that joining another party will ensure Democrat victory, and that Democrats would love for this to happen.

Regards,

Pete

Chris Smith

Can we count on you?

To: Representative Chris Smith
Congressman 4th Distinct, NJ 
Re: 2012 Election Fraud
Date: November 12, 2012
TPATH


Dear Chris Smith,
It seems unlikely that you have missed seeing the many reports about voter fraud in various swing states during this past election. If you have, by any chance, here are just a few links to some very disturbing reports.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/was_the_2012_election_stolen.html

http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/in-florida-obama-got-over-99-in-broward.html

http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/what-luck-obama-won-dozens-of-cleveland.html

http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/fraud-in-pa-obama-got-over-99-of-vote.html

http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/breaking-st-lucie-county-florida-had.html

http://articles.philly.com/2012-11-12/news/35069785_1_romney-supporters-mitt-romney-sasha-issenberg

http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/13/in-philadelphia-and-ohio-voting-districts-romney-recieves-zero-votes/

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/poll-watcher-sees-romney-ballots-changed/

As we all know the internet is filled with exaggerations and even flat out fabrications and as a result much care needs to be taken when regarding or believing articles.  Having said that, can there be any doubt that massive fraud and felonious activity appears to have taken place all across this country?

During the past 20 years I found myself unrepresented having had my town gerrymandered into Holt's bastion of liberalism.  Over the years when Holt was not ignoring me he was telling me to "shut up and sit down".  

Now that this latest round of redistricting has further encroached upon the Constitution by reinforcing the reality that my old district and my new one will have representatives unanswerable to the people, you are now my Representative and it appears, by way of party affiliation, we are ideologically aligned. But are we?

Having received many "form letter" responses from Holt which clearly indicated he had no intention of even reading of my concerns nor doing anything about them, I now wonder if my new Congressman will represent me differently.

In that vain I wish to pose these several questions to you:

1. Do any of the reports referenced above disturb you?

2. Is it even remotely possible that not one person voted for Romney in over 50 districts in Philadelphia?

3. Will you request a full investigation?

4. Will you pursue felony charges against those responsible for defiling our electoral process and committing felonies?

5. Will you allow this outrageous and flagrant attack on Democracy to go unpunished which will open the door for all future elections to be assaulted as this one clearly has been?

6. Will you do anything to stop the certification of this election until there is a clear accounting of which candidate actually won?

7. Will you not represent your constituents and verify for them, that this election was not a travesty?

All of us know that the US Justice Department is corrupt and not much more than a branch of the Obama political machine and will never lift a finger to protect the integrity of our Constitution or our political process.  

There is only one organization of power an authority that can initiate an investigation and work towards proving, one way or another that this election was not stolen.  That organization, is the House of Representatives.

Republicans and conservatives have long witnessed spineless representation from those in our leadership.  Many, many of us have just about had it.  That means there may be a massive exodus from Republican registration if we feel we need to go elsewhere to find the leadership courage required to save our Republic.  

The clock is ticking and it does not bode well for either our party or our country.  Congress has the power to pass a resolution asking every state Attorney General in states where these outrageous vote percentages have been reported, to refuse certification until a full accounting has been done.

This process may well cause contention, a word our Republican Party has always feared, but that fear of contentiousness should be  overwhelmed by the fear of losing our Republic.  

Without fair elections, the future is lost.  Will you be part of history that allowed that, or will you be the courageous leader who steps up and does what's right?


Thanks and I await your response.
Regards,
Dwight Kehoe


November 12, 2012 TPATH
`

By: Robert Quinn
Posted by TPATH
October 28, 2012


To America,
...OUR STOLEN COUNTRY-PART IV

 The Silent Media-Obama's Protector Truly disgraceful is the non-reporting by the major media of the existence of many lawsuits, encompassing plaintiffs of Caucasian, Black and Hispanic origin who were or are challenging Obama's claim of "natural-born"American citizenship. What the media gives us is best defined as silence. They even refused to run ads challenging his eligibility.

Reporters were chastened for bringing up the subject at Obama's news conferences. 

All major TV stations hitting the "mute" button on this issue, including one which (sadly) had repeatedly portrayed itself as "fair and balanced." Media malpractice gone wild! Recently, a CBS nationwide advertising site subsidiary refused to lease any site to Worldnet Daily for electronic signposts which simply read "Where's the Birth Certificate ?" Four simple words yet CBS knew they pertained to Obama. Truly, a guilty conscience needs no accuser.

Article I of our Constitution gave the Press the right to reveal, not conceal news of interest to the American People yet fear of disclosure of Obama's true eligibility status has permeated the Mainstream Media to this day. For almost four years they have been silent on this issue. Even the Fox Network, though vocally critical of the "Stimulus" plans, "Czar" appointees, etc.will not mention the existence of eligibility lawsuits presently in the courts. Bill O'Reilly of Fox claimed he saw a valid Obama birth certificate but had to retract his claim when informed that what Fox News actually viewed was a fraudulent "Certification of Live Birth" , not a "Certificate of Live Birth", the required document for legitimizing his Presidential eligibility. O'Reilly also said that the two newspaper clippings reporting Obama's "supposed" birth in Hawaii confirmed his eligibility.

Three years later, even after being made aware that in 1961 anyone could have prepared an Hawaiian birth certificate form and had it reported in the Newspapers, O'Reilly is still "parroting" his false claim and has the audacity each night to tell America "we're looking out for you."

With such a friend we do not lack for enemies. He also maintained silence throughout Lt.Col.Terrence Lakin's court-martial for refusing an order until Obama confirmed his Presidential eligibility. This was in accordance with an oath taken to defend the Constitution. Though Obama destroyed Lt.Colonel Lakin's 18 year faithful service to his Country this was kept hidden by the Media. Where were their voices in print and radio/tv? Lt.Colonel Lakin's trial was reported primarily by World Net Daily, the Post and E-mail and smaller internet and radio outlets.

A man lost his career for standing up for truth. Meanwhile, Obama traveled all over the country speaking to minority students who desperately (and deservedly) sought financial aid for higher education and a better life, yet he ignored a long-standing offer of Globe Magazine of $100,000 to assist those students if he produced a valid Certificate of Live Birth. As with Lt.Colonel Lakin, Obama responded with more silence.

An issue of monumental importance-completely suppressed by the Media. Consider, also, this late-breaking news. Donald Trump just made an offer of $5,000,000 (that's five million, folk's) to Obama for any cause of his choosing, if he will produce, by Oct.31,2012 documents such as his passport, school records,etc. which can satisfactorily support his claim of being a "natural-born" American citizen. I would suggest that Mr.Trump get on the line behind Lt.Colonel Lakin, Globe Magazine, and all the others awaiting Obama's transparency to exhibit itself. As a further example, recently a Georgia judge subpoenaed Obama to appear in court with proof of his eligibility if he wished to appear on the 2012 Georgia ballot. Obama ignored the subpoena and his attorney brazenly notified the Judge (in writing) that neither Obama nor his counsel would appear in court to answer it....and they didn't!



Did the Media report this miscarriage of justice? Simply put....NO!

Finally, Glenn Beck referred to the actions of questioning Obama's eligibility as "dumb". We are speaking about Presidential eligibility, an issue which our beleaguered Founders fought and died for and considered important enough to become the second article in The Constitution, not a footnote or suggestion.

How "dumb" is it to insist that Obama resolve this issue by authorizing release of the vault birth certificate, as well as other relevant documents (1981 Pakistan passport, college records,etc.) The actions which Beck scorned are simply demands for TRANSPARENCY....that's TRUTH.


The Governor of Hawaii vowed to secure a valid birth certificate from his Dept.of Health and came up empty-handed!

The General presiding at Lt.Colonel Lakin's court-martial would not allow the Colonel's defense team to even suggest that Obama be required to produce evidence of eligibility.

Sheriff Joseph Arpaio of Arizona, after a long investigative process which resulted in a declaration that the documents which Obama declared legitimate were fraudulent and most significant-NO HAWAIIAN hospital will acknowledge Obama's birth in their facility....that's no, as in none!

Oh,yes, how are things in Libya?
 TRANSPARENCY-A WORD OBAMA PROCLAIMS YET PROSTITUTES.
Some argue if the lawsuits presently in various courts force Obama to release documents which confirm he is not a "natural-born" American citizen there will be riots in the streets if he is removed from office. If he obtained the office by deception and fraud why should he be rewarded?

Are truth and honesty no longer desired? If a Caucasian was found guilty of obtaining the Presidency in like manner would anyone argue that they should remain in Office to avoid Caucasion riots?

Obviously, if the withheld documents could have confirmed Obama's eligibility the Democratic Party(particularly the vocal members who presently dismiss the eligibility issue) would have "pressed" him to release the documents to satisfy America, yet, even 100 lawsuits haven't induced him to practice the transparency he boasts of possessing.


 Obama recently recommended a "black" website for African-Americans to visit, to assist his Presidential campaign. His obvious intention: "vote color, not conscience". Imagine the uproar had Romney touted Caucasion websites for Caucasion Americans to visit, to assist his campaign.

My concern is for one's character....not their color. Sadly, Obama's character consists of a litany of lies and deception concerning his so-called Presidential eligibility and fraudulent birth records.

Many African-American individuals and organizations accept my writings and I theirs. I intended to support Herman Cain until personal problems forced his exit from the Presidential race. All my letters stress truth about the eligibility issue, so when politicians of any Party casually dismiss this issue with remarks like "this is not a major issue to me" are they aware of what they are saying? The person acting as President of the World's most powerful Nation has power to lead America toward prosperity or ruin, yet, they claim Obama's right to occupy that Office is not a major issue to them.

Also, to those who claim his eligibility has been authenticated by proof he provided, I remind them that proof consisting of fraudulent and/or ineligible documents is merely proof of fraud and/or ineligibility.


Four years ago, I started writing of challenges to Obama's "presumed" eligibility to seek the Office of President. A friend asked if I had stepped into the political arena. I replied "no-Obama stepped into the Religious arena when he said (among other things) that he had no problem leaving a child born after a "botched" abortion to die, if its mother so wished!

A common practice of Obama's eligibility defenders has been to claim anyone challenging him is racially motivated. It's a poor defense because African-American individuals and organizations challenging him are not racially driven.

On August 20,2012, Obama "pushed" Romney to disclose previous tax returns and had the audacity to say: "Those seeking the White House must know their life is an open book." Open book ? This from a man who will not let anyone even view the opening page of his life....his birth certificate!

I offer this suggestion to one of my e-mail recipients, Williard Mitt Romney. If he wishes to become our next President he need only offer to submit his tax returns to the American Public (as Obama has been insisting), if Obama, in return, will submit a valid Certificate of Live Birth, passport and School records (as America has been insisting) to confirm his Presidential eligibility. Would Obama refuse such an offer?  

Remember, we are speaking of a man who ruined an 18 year military career of an Army officer, refused to obey a subpoena in Georgia, ignored a $100,000 offer to help African-American students survive and I don't believe Donald Trump will hear from him.

To be continued ......

Regards,
Robert Quinn

Posted by TPATH
October 28, 2012


Contact Mr. Quinn
 robertquinn@earthlink.net 

`

  By Sid Fuller:
News Editor Radio Station, KFI  
February 1960

A self-governing society such as ours, a Republic in which the power to govern resides with the people themselves 
is particularly true.


No King rules us by royal decree. No Dictator lays down the law and requires the people to obey or else. No Tyrant
wields the power to command and punish.

On the contrary, We The People, through our elected President and our elected Legislators, are free to govern ourselves under laws of our own making and are fully responsible for our national security and our economic solvency and our social well-being. Within this framework of self-rules we have created the most durable and prosperous political society in all history. We say 'political' because the political principle of self-government lies at the root of the freedoms and abundance we enjoy.

This principle of self-government is a valid and dynamic one only so long as it is respected and invoked. Unless it is politically applied it withers like an unused muscle.  The penalty for dis-use is that a government of the people, by the people and for the people becomes a government for the benefit of some of the people.      

This is happening right now.

For far too many Americans, government is a political function exclusively the province of politicians. This misconception of the meaning of self-government, this political lethargy, has so diluted the political principle that is basic to our system of self-rule that political opportunists have been able to create an immense bureaucracy without parallel in all history.

By not governing ourselves, We, the people, are surrendering our right and power to govern ourselves.


We are being governed by some of the people who take the trouble to exert political pressure to further their own group objectives and feather their own group nest. By exercise of this pressure, these groups have proved that although the People have the power to resist that pressure, the People won't use it. The People are too content with abundance and possessions, too complacent and smugly satisfied to be-stir themselves and observe that they are surrendering their very freedoms.          

Instead of a vigorous, dynamic society of alert and responsible citizens willing to assume the obligations of self-rule, we tend to drift into the sorry condition of  beneficiaries of a Welfare State.   

Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona put it bluntly last week when he said - and these are his words: "For 25 years 
the apostles of a Welfare State have been busy transforming Uncle Sam from a symbol of freedom and dignity
and justice for all men into a national wet nurse - dispensing a cockeyed kind of patient medicine labelled "Something for Nothing" - passing out soothing syrup and rattles and pacifiers in return for grateful votes on election day."
 
And he goes on: "If there has been any development of softness in this nation, it has developed in our leadership,
and with the passive consent of the people. It is expressed in the fuzzy thinking of the master planners of the Super-State who would deny to Americans the right to think for themselves, to face their own responsibilities, to win their own personal victories and to justify by their own efforts the space they occupy on this earth.

"What hangs in the balance today? Not just this or that political party, not must this or that system of government; what is at stake in the mid-years of this century, what we will nobly preserve or meanly loose, are the dearest persuasions of 6,000 years of history. What is at stake is love, honor, justice, truth, and man's understanding of his relationship to Almighty God.

These are the component parts of Freedom."

Another Senator, this one a Democrat - Harry Byrd of Virginia - states the case in terms of specifics. Like this, and we quote:

"Our government is now subsidizing business, industry, private finance, agriculture, transportation, power, health, education,the States, localities and individual. Nearly 40 million people will receive money from the Federal treasury this year. With their families, these 40 million are almost half  the population of the US.

"In the name of social democracy we have descended to a level of State Socialism. Almost all of the increases in the national budget since 1954 has gone to pay for the expansion of these subsidy programs."

How can this be? How can we explain this drift away from solvency and toward Statism? There seem to be three explanations.

As we see it, one cause is the careless ballot. Political opportunists have discovered that the careless voter will settle for pie in the sky. The candidate who says he will look out for The People is a good candidate. The government taketh away and the government giveth. Blessed be the name of the Government!

Another cause is Pressure, in other words, the organized Lobby. Within the bailiwick of every lawmaker there are organized common-interest groups; Veterans, Farmers, Businessmen, Labor Unions and so on. The purpose of each group is pressure; the objective of pressure is to influence the passage of legislation favorable to one group as opposed to all others. We call it lobbying. Lobbying* is quite legal; actually where the executive or judicial branches of the government are concerned, there are no regulations to curb or control it. `````````````````````````````````
* TPATH NOTE: There have been lobbying laws written since this letter was authored, but since the lobbyist helped write them, it's only gotten worse.

October 26, 2012 TPATH
`

AND ALL THOSE THAT CALL
THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS

Open Letter To Evangelicals and Everyone Else

By Nicholas Purpura
September 26, 2012
Posted by TPATH 

Open your hearts and minds to what you will read herein. Most Americans are unaware that no less than 20-million Christians fail to vote. I ask every professing God-fearing Evangelical to stand firm for God principles and to start exercising your civil rights of citizenship – and make a copy of this article to give to your church leaders too. It’s time you register to vote and make your voice heard!

Are You a Christian?
Saying you’re a Christian does not make you a Christian, especially if you will passively sit by and allow altars to be erected in high places. Have you been so brainwashed that you believe what the secular-humanists and progressive Marxists have been dictating; and do you really believe this is acceptable in God’s eyes? Thomas Jefferson warmed us: “Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed the conviction that these liberties are the gift of God”?
Socialism, Marxism is and always has been contrary to God’s Word, which makes it incompatible with Christianity. These so-called pastors are nothing but wolves in sheep’s clothing, telling you that you are not of this world; therefore, you should not participate in worldly politics. 

These reprobate pastors have sold their souls not to make waves. They tickle your ears with false hopes in what can only be described as Sunday love fests. Yet, these shepherds readily allow Caesar to trump God’s word without even a whimper. Sort of reminds you of the Pharisees in the Old Testament.

The Declaration of Independence says: “…the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”. Each day our religious freedoms are being taken from us; yet we ignore the wisdom of our founding father, John Hancock, who reminded us; “Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual…Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us”.

The Bible tells us, of what happened to Israel when they allowed “alters” to be erected in high place, God cursed the land, do any of you who refuse to participate in government truly believe the United States has some kind of special dispensation? Or it’s acceptable for God to be removed from our schools and all public places. 

Ezekiel 33:6 states: “If, however, the lookout (Pastors) sees the enemy coming and does not sound the alarm, the enemy will come and kill those sinners, but I will hold the lookout responsible for their death.” It’s time every Pastor starts to discuss politics from the pulpit. Our 1st Amendment right talks about our right to worship without government interference. The words “separation of Church and State” do not appear in our 1st Amendment or in any of our foundational documents. God forbid we adhere to five un-elected hoodlums in black-robes who have elevated themselves above God’s law and the Constitution of these United States! Activist judges ruled we must have separation of church and State and created law where none existed. They completely perverted the meaning of the 1st Amendment to protect the State from the Church, when the 1st Amendment protects the Church from the State. It is time the church heeds the words of President Andrew Jackson and tells the judges to try and enforce that ruling. There comes a time for civil disobedience if said law violates God’s laws. We have seen the results of being passive: pray at sports events; stand and pray before all meetings; let them know we are here and we are not going anywhere. 

Sodomy became a virtue when our courts redefined marriage. It’s considered intolerance or homophobic if you refuse to accept marriage between sodomites. Even some misguided Christian dominations have openly allowed gay couples to preach God’s word - altering direct biblical precepts. Cicero tells us: “The first bond of society is marriage”

Abortion is a woman’s right, so 5-unelected hoodlums in Black-robes have allowed over 5000 babies to be killed every day! Have they forgotten that our Declaration of Independence clearly states that governments are instituted among men to protect our God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? 

I could go on, but I believe you are getting the picture. I remind you that the Supreme Court of these United States in 1892, held: “This is a Christian Nation,” says of the separation of church and state in the Revolution that it “was neither conceived of nor carried out…. Far from being left to itself, religion was embedded into every aspect and institution of American life.” 

The simplistic progressive has perverted the standard of right and wrong.  Their rallying cry is to scream that religion is the enemy of freedom, reasoning that obedience to the law of God hinders their ill conceived belief that any reliance upon religious authority inhabits their natural freedoms. Adam and Eve believed something similar in the Garden of Eden.  They were wrong then and the progressives are wrong now. 

Any reasonable person would ask: Why the deep vicious hatred towards God? It is simple, they want to be their own gods and decide what is right and wrong according to their own reasoning. They claim it’s about their freedom. But - they are already free. No! The freedom they aspire too is freedom from all restriction, which has always resulted in anarchy.  Just ask the ancient Greeks – with all their intellectual prowess, their Golden Age only lasted 50 years.  And, of course natural reason and religion deify the state. Dostoyevsky’s character Ivan said in The Brothers Karamazov: “…if there is no God, then anything is permissible.”

America has been blinded by the Marxist’s enlightenment, which is nothing more than an intellectual ploy to gain power over the gullible. It’s time for every Christian to stand up and say “As for me and my family we will serve the Lord!” 

Ronald Reagan left us with a profound warning: “If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.” Register to vote, get your friends and family out there, say “no more” to the State. 

Lastly, I encourage every reader to pray, read II Chronicles 7:14 “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sins, and will heal their land.”


The Eagle 
September 26, 2012 
Posted with enthusiasm by TPATH
 

 Posted by TPATH
Submitted by Ron Tea
August 23, 2102


The “2016” movie argues persuasively that Obama’s vision for America is really a dream from his father. In 1965, Barack Obama Sr. wrote in his journal[1] that Western and European “neocolonialists” should be taxed at 100% of income. Kenya never successfully redistributed wealth in this way, but the dream has re-emerged like a ghost in our nation’s oval office.
 
In “Dreams from My Father”, the junior Obama freely acknowledged his political ambitions were driven by a desire to emulate his father and prove something to him. And as president he’s demonstrated a father-like disdain for the notion of American exceptionalism, contending that (virtually insolvent) Greece has an equivalent basis for seeing itself in this light.  
 
If Obama were to implement his father’s ideals for social justice, our national debt would exceed $20 trillion in a decade, and unemployment could foreseeably rise to double digits.
 
Before marking their ballots this November, voters must ask themselves whether we can afford another four years of Obama’s America, exactly how much will re-electing Obama cost us, or whether he’s just dreamin’.
 
R. Tea
Los Angeles, CA

August 7, 2012
By TPATH

Below you will see a letter written to TPATH requesting that we forgo any effort to unseat Menendez, because its a lost cause and send our help and resources to the fights across the country.

Obviously, he thought he was talking to a guy who doesn't have an American Tea Party Congress.

First my response:
Hi David,
Most of the time I agree with you and your logic.
But I will respectfully disagree on your Menendez and Lautenberg comments.
First, as you know, Louse-en-berg still has two more years on his term. So he is a non-factor here in NJ, this election.
However, he is feeble in both body and mind and it is unlikely he will be effective and may even have to retire before his term is out.

Though not the most conservative Republican in the world Christie will appoint a Republican if they can't get the oatmeal off lautrenberg's chin.

Also there are two factors that you have not taken into account. One is the new unity of Conservatives and the Tea Party movement here in NJ.  It has taken the form of the American Tea Party Congress.  I don't know if you have been following this but, its historic.  We have actually gotten 31 Tea Party groups to join and speak in one voice.  Big things are about to happen.
Read a little about it here.
http://www.tpath.org/ATPC_Information_Page.php

We are having another meeting this Saturday where we expect several more groups will be joining.


Of course the other factor is the one that indicates independent voters are swinging 60% to Republicans.  Even though Menendez has a huge war chest, his seat is actually in play.

So we intend to fight for every vote and give up on no race.

Thanks,
Dwight
www.tpath.org


Then David's letter to me:
On 8/7/2012 8:46 AM, David Bock wrote:

As I always preach:  you can't win in NJ, so support conservatives across the US.  Let Lautenberg and Menendez stay. You can't get rid of them, and why would you want to replace them with a RINO and just make the RINOs stronger ?  As long as we have a majority in the House and Senate, , who cares where they come from ? Send your bucks to real conservatives no matter their location.  Cruz should be great in the Senate.  Even if Kyrillos could win ( and he can't ) he would be just another 'moderate' which is to say a Lib.  

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/08/01/the-establishments-near-sexual-advances-on-ted-cruz-are-about-to-begin/ 

--
Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. … Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the “new,wonderful good society” which shall now be Rome’s, interpreted to mean “more money, more ease, more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious.”
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.)