FreeWestRadio.com

by Mary L.G. Theroux, The Independent Institute

The current $350 million ad campaign for the 2010 Census, including the much-maligned $2.5 million Super Bowl spots, urges individuals to “Tell your story.” The Census Bureau is particularly eager for minorities and illegal immigrants to do so, as they are traditionally believed to be the most undercounted.

Yet widespread non-compliance, especially among those most likely to be discriminated against by a majority, may not be rooted strictly in the “ignorance” the ads are designed to overcome. History—including very recent history—shows that the information provided to the Census can be used against you.

The most recent examples occurred in 2002 and 2003, when the Census Bureau turned over information it had collected about Arab-Americans to Homeland Security.

Data from the 1940 Census was used to intern Japanese, Italian, and German Americans following the U.S.’s entry into the war, and to monitor and persecute others who escaped internment. In addition to providing geographic information to the War Department, the Census Bureau released the name, address, age, sex, citizenship status and occupation of Japanese Americans in the Washington, D.C., area to the Treasury Department in response to anunspecified threat against President Franklin Roosevelt in 1943.

There may well be other instances of such data sharing of which we remain unaware, as the full scope of the personal information released during World War II has only recently been brought to light.

Thus, while the Census Bureau assures us that “your confidentiality is protected. Title 13 requires the Census Bureau to keep all information about you and all other respondents strictly confidential,” these exceptions negate such assurances. Of course, the release of the “strictly confidential” data was also perfectly legal: during World War II, under the terms of the Second War Powers Act, and more recently, under the terms of the USA PATRIOT Act, now extended by the Obama administration.

In preparation for this year’s census, 140,000 workers were hired to collect GPS readings for every front door in the nation. Such pinpoint precision will certainly simplify the process of locating any individual or group that may be identified as a threat to “national security” in the future. Remember, for example, the 1976 Senate Report in which 26,000 Americans were slated for roundup by the FBI in the event of a national emergency at the height of the Cold War. Now that the U.S. Government’s Terrorist Watchlist has exceeded one million, the GPS data acquired could be instrumental in accomplishing such a roundup.

Meanwhile, the data is also shared a little more broadly than advertised. Stanford University recently joined UC Berkeley, Duke, the University of Michigan, UCLA, and others in having its very own census data center. As the director of the new center explained, “The Census Bureau is very interested in making the centers more accessible to scholars who can use the data they provide.”

As Henry Brady, dean of the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley and principal investigator for the California Census Research Data Centers helpfully added: “We’re trying to make centers where lots of federal agencies will let us use their data.”

While reassurances are repeated that the data is held under the strictest security, and will only be used for innocuous projects like “government programs and solutions to our problems,” do we really want academics to social engineer policy solutions based on sensitive personal data? After all, they may turn out to be no more desirable than the “solutions” provided by government programs like internment and renditioning. Without the protections afforded by a right to privacy, there’s little chance of escaping a political will to enforce discriminatory policies.

This “mission creep” for the Census thus pushes up against a level of discomfort no amount of advertising dollars can likely assuage. Many will no doubt choose to follow former Senate majority leader Trent Lott’s advice to skip any Census questions they feel violates their privacy—which may well include any exceeding the Constitution’s mandate for an “actual Enumeration.” Unfortunately, choosing privacy now costs more: legislation recently passed raises the fine for “anyone over 18 years old who refuses or willfully neglects to complete the questionnaire or answer questions posed by census takers” from a limit of $100 to $5,000—a fact not advertised even in the small print.

by Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.

(Editor’s note: This three-art series was written in 2007, and refers to Ron Paul’s presidential candidacy. But Rep. Paul is more viable and vital now in 2010 than he was before the last election, so the points Vieira makes are timely.)

3. True—that is, constitutional—Militia suffer from none of these defects. Specifically:

•First and foremost, proponents of revitalizing “the Militia of the several States” refuse to assume that “all is lost” already, but instead concern themselves with how We the People, through their Militia, can preserve “the security of a free State” in this country today and throughout the foreseeable future, as the Constitution tells them they can.

•Rather than antagonists of “the government” in general, the Militia are permanent parts of each State’s government in particular, and temporary parts of the General Government when called into the actual service of the United States.

•Far from being organizations of questionable legality, let alone criminal conspiracies, the Militia are declared by the Constitution itself to be “necessary to the security of a free State,” and empowered and required by the Constitution itself to “execute the Laws of the Union.” Moreover, the Militia constitute the best way to put down usurpers and tyrants—because, when such miscreants employ armed force or the threat thereof to violate the law under color of the law, they are in insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution; and the Constitution itself assigns to the Militia the power and the duty to “suppress Insurrections.”

•Revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” can and will succeed, because We the People have the overwhelming numbers to make it work through their State legislatures, one State at a time. After all, proper constitutional Militia will consist not just of a few individuals drawn from a narrow segment of society (such as “the gun culture”), but of the vast majority of individuals enrolled from throughout the community. Militia training and duties will focus not only on firearms, but on all aspects of “homeland security,” much of which will have nothing to do with firearms. Thus, “the Militia of the several States” will need, and be able, to enlist members of the Society of Friends, as well as members of the National Rifle Association. In that way, the Militia will be unifying forces in every State, in the spirit of the “more perfect Union” that the Preamble sets as the Constitution’s very first goal—and in contradiction of the primary tactic of the Forces of Darkness, “divide and conquer.” And through unity will come strength, because We the People will become aware of their authority and power, when they finally concert their own efforts for “the common defense” and “the general Welfare.”

4. All this being so, what is to be done? Just as the Chinese character for “crisis” contains the characters for “opportunity” as well as “danger,” so too does America’s present situation exhibit both a bright and a dark aspect.

a. The bright side is the enthusiastic reception average Americans of all persuasions are giving to the Presidential candidacy of Representative Ron Paul. Now, Representative Paul should be encouraged to make revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” a fundamental, non-negotiable issue in the forefront of his campaign, for several reasons:

•The Militia are constitutionally required. For a constitutionalist President, whom the Constitution explicitly designates as “Commander in Chief * * * of the Militia of the several States,” that alone should suffice.

•Revitalization of the Militia is the best—and I believe the only—way to demolish the National police state now being erected by the NeoConzis and their stooges and fellow travelers in the General Government. And demolishing it must be every common American’s goal, before addressing any other issue—for once a police state clamps down on this country, all hope of peaceful reform will go by the boards. Once united, Ron Paul’s candidacy and a movement to revitalize the Militia could prove unstoppable, because, on both the political “right” and “left,” no one but a handful of supranational fascists, Neoconzis, and other subversives—and their utterly discredited political Pinocchios—wants a National police state.

•Revitalization of the Militia is the best—and I believe the only—way to restore real self-government to America, by having people participate, on a regular basis and in detail, in government in their own States and Localities throughout the periods between elections.

•Perhaps the President’s most important constitutional duty is to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” the Constitution itself foremost among them. The Militia are the only establishments to which the Constitution explicitly assigns this function: “to execute the Laws of the Union.” Therefore, as Commander in Chief of the Militia, the President enjoys the constitutional authority to employ the Militia to fulfill his duty to “take Care.” And, in light of the numerous problems facing this country, from the current invasion of illegal immigrants to the imminence of a collapse of the monetary and banking systems, President Paul will need the assistance of the Militia at every turn.

Although he will be President, Ron Paul will not by himself be enough to turn this country around. For he will be a truly constitutional President, with powers the strict limitation of which he recognizes and respects. So he will need the full support of a self-governing people to ensure that “the Laws be faithfully executed” in the face of all the opposition that the Forces of Darkness will incite against him. And the Militia will provide this support. Who else can?

For example, President Paul will surely refuse, on constitutional grounds, to enforce the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and other abusive legislation of that ilk. For the time being, that may suffice. But the long run is a different matter. As a constitutionalist, President Paul cannot formally strike those statutes from the books. Neither can he unilaterally provide by “executive order,” “presidential proclamation,” or some other ukase the necessary new, constitutional “homeland-security” legislation America may require. For such legislation, he must look to a legislature, such as Congress—and perhaps a hostile Congress, at that. Even more important, he must create and leave in place a proper system of “homeland security” based on self-government by We the People. If he does not, some future Administration and subservient Congress may—probably will—put back into place something like the Patriot Act and related legislation, because the Forces of Darkness absolutely require a police state in this country to carry out their nefarious purposes. The only solution to this problem is to revitalize “the Militia of the several States.” As the Militias’ Commander in Chief, President Paul can promote whatever State legislation may be necessary to enable him to fulfill his constitutional duties in that particular. Each of the States can enact the requisite statutes independently of a recalcitrant Congress. And, once again in place, “the Militia of the several States” will provide a permanent bulwark against encroachments on Americans’ liberties by the Forces of Darkness. True federalism at work—the only way it can work under present circumstances.

For another example, the Federal Reserve System cannot be abolished by the President on his own initiative and immediately. And not just for constitutional reasons, either. Reform requires replacement of the banking cartel and its paper currency with constitutional systems of money and banking in such a systematic, carefully measured way as to avoid setting off an economic catastrophe. This will necessitate a gradual “bottom up,” not a sudden “top down,” approach—initially, on a State-by-State basis, so as to create an ever-expanding fait accompli that will force a reluctant Congress to follow suit (for an example, see my “electronic gold currency bill” for New Hampshire, at www.goldmoneybill.org). Obviously, inasmuch as monetary and banking stability is a key aspect of “homeland security,” the Militia can and should play a dominant role in pushing these reforms through at the State and Local levels, and then making them work in practice through the free market.

•A fundamentally important political principle is involved here, too. Even with Ron Paul as President, common Americans will have to stop thinking in terms of the Leader Principle—that is, who is to be President, or who is to control Congress or the Supreme Court—as if these vanishingly few individuals were the political “be all and end all” in this huge country. Instead, Americans must start thinking about—and actually taking charge of—self-government in their own States and Localities. The genius of America is not the Leader Principle, but the Popular Principle. And the Militia are the heart of the Popular Principle. For they put the Power of the Sword into the People’s hands. And with that come all other legitimate powers, “[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.”

(By the way, I have not discussed this matter with Representative Paul, or in any way been induced to make these suggestions by anyone in his campaign-organization.)

b. On the dark side is the possibility that Representative Paul will not be elected President in 2008. Given that possibility, you had better start working to revitalize “the Militia of the several States” right now—because, if one of the grotesque Republicractic puppet-candidates the Establishment is touting ends up in the White House, Americans will desperately need the Militia. If you do not want to live with serial false-flag “terrorist” strikes across this country; an ever-expanding, never-ending conflict in the Middle East; a draft in order to muster the cannon fodder to fight a billion Muslims to the last American; a domestic police state to suppress dissent in general and “disappear” true patriots in particular; chronic monetary and banking crises; the financial gutting of America’s middle class; national bankruptcy; and the end of America herself through imposition of a North American Union—then you need to participate in a nationwide, grass-roots movement to revitalize the Militia. Immediately, if not sooner.

Now is the time for the people who are America to start saving America. Where you happen to be is as good a place as any to begin. You have the means to do it, in your own hands. You have sufficient allies, in your family members, friends, neighbors, and co-workers. But if you sit back and do nothing, you will have only yourself to blame when you end up with nothing but grief.

© 2007 Edwin Vieira, Jr. – All Rights Reserved

by Dr. Edwin Vieira, PhD, JD (from DumpDC)

Although at the present time I am one of very few people, if not the only person, vociferously advocating revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” along strict constitutional lines, I am confident that the Forces of Darkness fully anticipate that I shall not remain for much longer a lonely “voice crying in the wilderness” of the Internet and the market for rare books. Rather, as this country lurches ever-closer to crisis because of their insatiable avarice, ambition, and appetite for power, accelerated by their inexhaustible arrogance, the Forces of Darkness realize that time is running out and that truth will out. The consequences of that eventuality being so detrimental to them, they need to take counteraction soon, before they find themselves pitched out on their ears.

They have four options:

*Silence—to keep as many people as possible in the dark about revitalization of the Militia for as long as possible. If that does not work,
* Misdirection—to lead the initially small number of self-educated idealists and activists into self-destructive behavior. If that does not work,
*Defamation—to smother the movement in derision and demonization, so as to poison the minds of the general public, and thereby stunt the movement’s growth. And only if all these do not work,
*Suppression—to employ brutal police-state methods to smash the movement (although such a course of action may prove problematic, possibly self-defeating, once the Militia have been revitalized in even a few States).

With the Internet in so many homes, silence is no longer a viable tactic. The idea already courses through the ether, easily accessible to all and not subject to erasure. Moreover, left to its own devices, it can only gain adherents and practitioners, because revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” offers the best alternative available to return this country to constitutional self-government by We the People in the near future.

Defamation is not at the present time a viable tactic, either. Inasmuch as derision and demonization contradict the tactic of silence, they can be employed only when silence no longer suffices: that is, only when an idea already threatens to explode into a powerful political movement. For revitalization of the Militia, however, that time has not quite arrived. So the Forces of Darkness need not yet mobilize their morally club-footed Goebbels-figures in the media and among the intelligentsiia—although this country can expect to hear from these ranters soon enough, as more and more common Americans wake up, listen up, and start to speak and act up, and the enemies of popular self-government try to shut them up with name-calling, bluster, and threats.

So, right now, Americans should expect the Forces of Darkness to favor misdirection in order to divert idealists and activists from the true Militia to various false “militias”. Misdirection can be adventitious, when the Forces of Darkness rely on common people who are acting in good faith, albeit mistakenly. Or it can be artificial, when the Forces of Darkness deploy their own malicious agents provocateurs and other operatives to conduct people down blind alleys.

1. In the first category are found most of those Americans around the country who already participate in, or contemplate joining, various private “militias.” By in large, their motivations are patriotic and to that extent laudable. Nonetheless, because few of them are legal historians, their research tends to be less than sufficient, their plans less than adequate, for the difficult task they have set themselves to perform.

Although some of these private “militias” claim “common law” as their basis, they cannot stand on such a foundation. For “common law” had nothing whatsoever to do with the formation and operation of the Militia in any of the Colonies or independent States prior to ratification of the Constitution. All of those Militia were the products of charters or statutes. And in none of them did judges or sheriffs play any directing role. Under the Constitution, therefore, the same pattern must obtain today.

As wholly private organizations with no legal authority peculiar to themselves—for certainly not a single one of them has been empowered by a State statute to participate in the activities they have taken upon themselves—these “militias” are necessarily not parts of the government of any State or Locality. Indeed, they view themselves as at least potential antagonists and opponents of “the government” in general—which they condemn (and not inaccurately) for serial oppressions already inflicted upon common Americans; which they suspect (and not unfairly) is plotting to commit even more of these offenses; and which they intend and are preparing to resist. Their resistance, however, they proclaim will be entirely defensive—an assertion supported by their behavior. For their members arm for and train in the small-unit tactics practiced by guerrilleros, steeling themselves for the day when “the government” causes some crisis so devastating that large numbers of Americans are compelled to rise up in open, armed rebellion, to preserve their lives, liberties, and property from wanton destruction.

That such a crisis is possible, perhaps rather probable, is anything but a paranoid delusion that haunts these private “militias” alone. For example:

*Some 9/11-type “terrorist strike,” whether real or engineered, might be used to rationalize a nationwide police-state lockdown under “emergency powers” and “martial law.”
*As part of or in preparation for such a lockdown, a nationwide seizure of privately owned firearms might be attempted.
*A gun grab might set the stage or provide the excuse for a nationwide round-up of dissidents for incarceration in concentration camps.
*A monetary and banking collapse might usher in, or result from, a nationwide police-state crackdown. And,
*Even an apparently benign “merger” that melds Canada, the United States, and Mexico into a North American Union could serve as a reason for confiscation of Americans’ privately owned firearms—because the “gun-control” laws in Canada and Mexico could not coexist with the rights Americans now enjoy under the Second Amendment; with “open borders” the traffic into and out of the United States would defeat those Canadian and Mexican laws; and, therefore, the Second Amendment would have to be set aside perforce of the North American Union’s supposed “supremacy” in hemispheric legislation.

In any event, when the day of reckoning finally dawns, for whatever reason, these various private “militias” expect to fight “the government” somewhere —in the forests, swamps, and hills—in the sewers and utility-tunnels of the big cities—in the residential rabbit warrens of suburbia—until the majority of the population finally comes to its senses and joins them. Or at least the “militias” will survive as guerrillas, managing to elude extermination or capture.

Such private “militias” exist, and will continue to exist, because they embody the romantic legends that surround Robin Hood, Francis Marion, John Singleton Mosby, Michael Collins, the French Resistance, and the Hungarian freedom fighters. Unfortunately, in any major crisis in the near future they will fail of their purpose, because they will lack sufficient members, supporters, and sympathizers. This, for at least three reasons:

First, these private “militias” enjoy no credible claim to any actual legal authority as “militias.” And, absent color of authority, they cannot convince more than a small minority of Americans to participate actively in their operations, or the majority of their countrymen to support them even passively.

Second, these private “militias” tend to recruit their members almost exclusively from one social group: the so-called “gun culture.” For this reason, all too many Americans dismiss them as being composed of “extremists,” if not worse. Such misconceived disdain is the practical kiss of death for their strategy, because in the classical formulation guerrillas are the fish, the rest of the people the sea—and without the sea in which to move, to find nourishment, and to hide from predators, the fish will die.

Third, and worst of all, these private “militias” predicate the necessity for their existence on the conclusion that the American people have already lost the major legal and political battle for liberty. For them, “the Constitution is dead”—“the government” is separate from, independent of, antagonistic to, and irretrievably the enemy of We the People—and tyranny cannot be deterred, forestalled, or defeated throughout this country, only feebly resisted here and there.

To characterize this argument as merely erroneous credits it too much. It is pernicious. For the Constitution is absolutely essential to prove what We the People’s powers are, and (even more to the point) what the powers of rogue public officials are not—in particular, that these usurpers and tyrants enjoy no more authority, and should expect no more obedience, than a bag-woman on the streets of New York City. After all, without the Constitution, what legal basis for self-government by We the People must public officials respect? If the honest ones want to claim their offices under the Constitution (as all of them do, at least in form), they must also admit the Constitution’s limitations on the powers of those offices. They cannot assert their constitutional powers without abiding by their constitutional disabilities. Therefore, they must concede We the People’s supreme authority under the Constitution, too. And as for dishonest, rogue public officials, the Constitution provides We the People with the most efficacious means to suppress their misbehavior, if Americans have the wit, the wisdom, and the will to use it—the very first step in the process being to affirm that those means are very much alive, not “dead.”

© 2007 Edwin Vieira, Jr. – All Rights Reserved

Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.

He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us

He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel “CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire” (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com

His latest book is: “How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary” … and Constitutional “Homeland Security,” Volume One, The Nation in Arms…

He can be reached at:
13877 Napa Drive
Manassas, Virginia 20112.

Local governments in massive revolt against rules ordered by Washington

by Bob Unruh, WND

Utah has become the third state to adopt a law exempting guns and ammunition made, sold and used in the state from massive federal regulations under the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and supporters say about 30 more states have some sort of plan for their own exemptions in the works.

Officials in Utah say they expect a lawsuit over their direct challenge to Washington if the federal government succeeds in its current case against Montana’s law.

Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, who has spearheaded the Montana law, now describes himself as a sort of “godfather” to the national campaign. He confirmed Montana, Tennessee and Utah have enacted such laws.

“Wyoming and South Dakota, they have passed legislation and it’s on their governors’ desks,” he said. “We learned today Oklahoma’s House has passed a plan over to the Senate. Idaho’s House has just passed it along. Alaska’s has passed the House and is in the Senate Judiciary committee,” he said.

The move is about far more than just the regulation of handguns and shotguns, he said.

Read the rest at this link.

by David Spackman, NE

You can bet your own senator is just as corrupt as the example below.

Utah Senator Bennett corruption exposed, and other thoughts about him.

During the economic collapse precipitated by the rising number of home mortgage defaults and the associated devaluation in mortgage securities, much was said, especially by politicians, about Wall Street greed.  Much less fuss was made about political greed, but it became evident to me that political greed started the whole thing. Legislation and policy encouraging (and I heard stories of coercion) the loosening of mortgage standards so that under-qualified (high risk) people could live the “American Dream” of home ownership may have been supported by many for altruistic reasons, but I propose that most of the political movers and shakers were building a new voting constituency, benefited personally through campaign contributions or other means, and used it to otherwise increase their political power.

This reckless and irresponsible policy didn’t just hurt the under-qualified homeowners who defaulted, it snowballed into the worst economic downturn in my lifetime, including the highest unemployment, and even more governmental irresponsibility of national-debt-ridden economic bailouts and government takeover of huge businesses.

Forefront in the scandal was the government sponsored organizations Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  They were organized to facilitate mortgage access to non-traditional lenders by buying mortgages from lenders, and bundling them into mortgage securities to sell in the investment markets.  They were aggressive in pushing legislation and policy towards relaxing mortgage standards, including significant campaign donations to Congress.  The top three campaign contribution recipients from Fannie and Freddie, 1989-2008 were Democratic Senators Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, and John Kerry http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html

Those three were identified in the press and criticized for their corruption. See http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html for an example.

Senator Bennett was the fourth-highest recipient!

Receiving a campaign contribution is not in itself corrupt.  Letting it influence you to pursue destructive policy is corrupt.  I became convinced of Senator Bennett’s corruption when a friend shared with me a report by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, Republican from California, entitled “The Role of Government Affordable Housing Policy in Creating the Global Financial Crisis of 2008” dated 7 Jul 09. http://republicans.oversight.house.gov/images/stories/Reports/20090707HousingCrisisReport.pdf

This report thoroughly documents how the government created the economic disaster we are in.  Among other players, it says this about our Senator:

REFORM OF FANNIE AND FREDDIE THWARTED: FOR A PRICE

The GSEs’ (Freddie and Fannie) political risk management succeeded in thwarting congressional and Bush Administration attempts at reform.  In 2004, Senators Hagel, Sununu, Dole, and McCain, took up Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan’s call to create stronger regulatory oversight of the GSEs and limit the amount of leverage GSEs could use to invest in risky mortgage lending. While this would not have interfered with the GSEs’ role in providing a secondary mortgage market, it would have reduced their ability to fund high-risk lending with borrowed money and cut into the companies’ fabled profit margins and executive compensation. However, when the Senate Banking Committee took up the legislation, S.1508, Democrats and some Republicans opposed it as originally drafted.  For example, the legislation was approved by the Committee only after Senator Robert Bennett, whose son was employed by the Fannie Mae partnership office in Utah, attached an amendment that stripped the provision which would have allowed a new regulator to limit the GSEs’ leverage.  This led the Bush Administration to withdraw its support from the weakened legislation, which ultimately failed to pass the full Senate.

I conclude that Senator Bennett is corrupt because he accepted large donations and probably had influence in his son’s employment with the donor, and then acted to protect the donor, instead of doing what was good and right for his constituents and the country.

One might argue that the Senator learned his lesson and has repented.  But disturbingly, opensecrets.org reports that in the 2010 election cycle, his forth-largest contributor is Freddie Mac at $38,399 and the 11^th largest is Fannie Mae at $27,500.

My observation of Senator Bennett over the years is that he is a politician first and a conservative 1/6^th of the time.  In his re-election year he does much to make himself look conservative, and communicates substantively with this conservative base.  Then he blows us off for 5 years.  I always get a reply from Rob Bishop when I contact him, and I usually get one from Hatch.  I almost never get a reply from Bennett.  I have heard him speak at several conventions.  His speeches usually focus on political details, not about fighting the conservative fight.

He claimed a huge victory at the Box Elder County Lincoln Day Dinner straw poll last week.  I was there and had an opportunity to review the results and the attendance list. When the vote totals are adjusted for out-of-county people each candidate brought in, the results are:

Bennett 106

Lee 95

Eager 37

Bridgewater 25

Williams 4

Note that 95+37+25+4=161 non-Bennett votes. That puts him at just less than 40% of the vote, which would have knocked him out of the race at convention.

Senator Bennett said in an email recently that with the real possibility of Republicans regaining control of Senate, this is no time for a rookie.  I am very tired of the seniority argument.  I’ll take an articulate, passionate, and consistent conservative that is fighting for us over corrupt seniority any day.

Just like Scott Brown rocked the Democrats by winning Ted Kennedy’s seat, I suggest we rock the Republican Party by taking out Bennett at convention.  The Party and the country will be better for it.

To the Bennett supporters—I hope you’ll reconsider with this corruption report.  To everyone else, including those who have disengaged from the Republican Party—get to your caucus with some friends and get elected as a State Delegate.

As one of you emailed me recently: Fight organized crime, Don’t reelect anyone!

National Expositor Note: Not only, Don’t reelect anyone.  Stop voting for the establishment parties.