Thursday, April 10, 2014

Google Partners Connect in Greenville, SC

Wednesday, May 21
at 2:00pm - 4:00pm


Presented by Google covering a range of topics such as Google Apps For Business, digital marketing and current best practices to leverage the web for your enterprise.

Location in Greenville, SC to be announced. Attendance is free and refreshments will be provided.

Register for free here and here

read more about Google Apps for Business

Friday, November 11, 2011

Another Sheriff that Understands His Duty

Under common law this is exactly what a county sheriff is supposed to do:

Otero County decided to put the State law to thin out the forests to the test and notified the feds.  The US Forest Service threatened to ARREST Congressman Steve Pearce and Otero County Commissioners!  Otero County Sheriff Benny House reportedly advised the feds that if they made any arrests, he would then arrest the feds on kidnapping charges.
On September 17th, keeping his Oath of Office to the Constitution and the People, Sheriff Benny House and his SWAT Team protected the tree cutters.  The feds backed down!  The feds were absent from the Tree Party Rebellion.  This is because within the county, the sheriff is the highest law enforcement authority in the land. (From The Tenth Amendment Center)

We meed more sheriffs in counties across the land to understand that under common law they are the highest law enforcement in their county, no matter who may show up in a federal costume.

Kudo's Sheriff House!

Tuesday, November 08, 2011

16 Nations Want to Challenge SC Immigration Law

I will not discuss the pros and cons of this law. I do have thoughts on the notion of a foreign nation suing a state. How could they have standing, how is such constitutional?

Well under article III Section 2 such a circumstance is authorized by the Federal Constitution -

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting.... between Citizens of different States,--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

As a 10th Amendment State's Rights fellow I fully support the authority of the State of South Carolina to enact and reasonable and otherwise constitutional and just law. Nowhere within the Constitution can one find verbiage that would indicate that our fair state is not fully within its rights to enact this law. So on what grounds will the case against our state be made? The same as always it seems the 14th Amendment. This amendment was so poorly written and so contrary to the very spirit of the constitution that existed previously it is no wonder that it was never properly and legally ratified.

What a wordy, convoluted piece of work this amendment is and how nefarious it use in denigrating other portions of the Constitution. However, it would appear to me there are words in this poorly written document that no state has ever dared use in defense of state laws.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Beyond the fact that the founders never intended to create US Citizens and the aforementioned little matter of this amendment not even being de jure law it has become de facto law and it is the primary catalyst for much of what our Federal government has become. But consider for a moment the last portion of the first sentence.

"are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside".

Reading this plainly it is clear that every South Carolinian has dual citizenship. The amendment does not call us "residents" it calls us citizens of our state and in legal terms as used here citizen has special meaning.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Under Article 1 Section 8 Congress has the delegated power to "Establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization" but it can be argued, and 18 USC Section 7(C) supports this assertion - the United States may only exercise plenary criminal jurisdiction over lands within a state that the Federal Government owns and the state has consented to the Federal Government jurisdiction.

Thus there are three key points that South Carolina could make in this case that would advance the cause of those of us that love our States more than the Federal government.

1) Dual citizenship does exist as expressed in the 14th Amendment - we are actually citizens of South Carolina not merely residents. This point of fact, argued in law would serve us well later.
2) Although the Congress has the authority to establish uniform naturalization the Constitution did not specifically delegate the Federal government the power to police this within a State's borders.
3) The X Amendment applies and South Carolina's Immigration law could have gone further making it a State crime to reside in the State without meeting the Naturalization and Visa requirements that the Congress has established under their Constitutional authority. There is no need to call a federal agent, the county sheriff could arrest and prosecute an illegal under such a law.
4) The 14th Amendment applies only to citizens as defined by the 14th Amendment - it does not apply to illegals - therefore any Federal government arguments based upon that amendment in opposition to this law are void.

Dr. Clyde N. Wilson on Rebellion

A Little Rebellion

Scandalously, Thomas Jefferson once wrote to James Madison, “I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and is as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.” writes Dr. Clyde N. Wilson -retired professor of History at USC and one of my favorite authors.

He continues:

Persistent misrepresentation of Jefferson’s words here and elsewhere by later generations has obscured what he meant. A dangerous radical? A chronic upsetter of social order? No. Jefferson does not call for an overturn of society and its reconstruction according to some abstract plan. Think of the root meaning of the term revolution. Jefferson, in fact, is mostly satisfied with his society (Virginia), although he is interested in a few small reforms that might broaden its base. So are his followers satisfied with their portions of America. That is why they support him. Despite the hysterical and sometimes insincere denunciations of the New England clergy, the Virginia planter is no Jacobin. As he sees things, any government, with the passage of time and the accretion of abuses and bad precedents, becomes corrupted. It needs to be revolved back to its original principles.
In sum Dr. Wilson argues that the entire reason the Occupy Wall Street movement has any traction at all with its socialist and communist ideas is because conservative America long ago lost its will to fundamentally set the system back to our previous natural and good order.

Sunday, November 06, 2011

Burglars Target Shop While Owners at Hospital

While John Olihan was at his wife's side during a chemotherapy treatment, burglars targeted his boat repair shop on Highway 187.
The burglary at J's Marine was the second time thieves had broken into the shop. Twelve hours earlier, Kristopher Paul Liebe was arrested after Anderson County deputies said Liebe was spotted with burglary tools on the property....

Read more: http://www.wyff4.com/news/29668928/detail.html#ixzz1cxDhvqUF


It seems this will all just get worse as the economy continues to fail.

Saturday, November 05, 2011

Upstate Power Grab

From South Carolina Campaign for Liberty


Friends of South Carolina,

How does an obscure study by an out of state think tank become the law of the land?

In South Carolina, Hugh Leatherman teams up with his Democratic buddies to create a new government agency tasked with implementing it, that’s how!

You read that right! Republican (in name at least) Hugh Leatherman teamed up with seven Democrats to create a new agency with the authority to, among other things, manage the economy, education, healthcare, infrastructure, and financial structures of 17 counties along I-95.

And from the looks of this e-mail blast from “Ten at the Top,” an NGO (non-governmental organization) working to implement Agenda 21 in the South Carolina upcountry, an I-85 Corridor Authority is likely in the works for the near future, as well.

Leatherman is the sole Republican sponsor of this “I-95 Corridor Authority” bill, S211. His liberal buddies, Matthews, Land, Leventis, Hutto, Williams, Ford, and McGill all co-sponsored the bill with him to create this new agency.

I wrote about this new agency’s power and who will wield itearlier.

Fortunately, the Governor vetoed this bill. However the Senate handily overrode the veto 30 – 10.

Now, we have one last chance to stop this mammoth new agency.  But only if we can get the House to vote to sustain the governor’s veto.

A list of Representatives who voted to create this monstrosity is at the end of this e-mail.

Contact your representative, no matter how they voted the first time, and tell them to sustain the governor’s veto of S211.

This new agency, according to S211, will “oversee the implementation of the recommendations contained in the I-95 Corridor Human Needs Assessment published in December 2009.”

This Assessment makes 64 recommendations for action.  All 64 will become required by law if this veto is not sustained. Some are very specific, but most are very broad, general suggestions, like recommendation 4.4.1, “Encourage consolidation of water services”. How... to what end... with what means? Those questions are not answered and are left up to this new agency to determine. But whatever they determine, they will be required to “encourage consolidation of water services”... by law if this veto is not sustained.And since this edict and many others in this Assessment are not circumscribed with limitations of any kind, they become a wide open avenue to abuse of power and authority.

Here are some of the recommendations that will become law if the House overrides the governor’s veto:

  • Recommendation 1.1.4: “Foster greater use of public-private partnerships.”  Yeah... like the SCRA and the Inovista projects that work so well. Insert sarcasm here!
  • Recommendation 1.2.1: “Act as a political block.” Really?  Are these counties going to merge into one super county?  Are the needs of Beaufort county the same as the needs of Marlboro County?  And the General Assembly thinks they can be forced to act together as a political block.  Yeah.
  • Recommendation 2.1.4: “Broker linkages between people, communities, and industries.”  Huh.   What exactly does that mean?  No matter... if this veto is overridden, it becomes a requirement for implementation and a wide avenue to abuse of power because the Authority can make it mean anything they want.
  • Recommendation 2.4.5 is one of my favorites: “Leverage the region’s agricultural base in innovative ways to feed new markets and cultivate agritourism.” Agritourism?  Hahahaha!   Corn mazes are going to save our economy?  That, by itself, should convince folks to never let government plan our economy!

Well, that is just a short sampling. And I haven’t even touched on how it “recommends” that the educational system be improved, or how to “close the infrastructure gap,” or even how to “target disparities in health and social services.”

Maybe I’ll list some more in a future mailing.

Until then, please, contact your State Representative today and tell him to sustain the governor’s veto of S211, The I-95 Corridor Authority Act.  It is vital to the future wellbeing of our state to stop this thing!

Our State Representatives are our last chance to prevent this huge growth in the size, spending, and authority of our state government!

You can find who your State Representative is at this link by entering your zip code.

Below, you can see a list of all the Representatives who voted for this boondoggle and who chose not to vote at all.

The House will vote on the veto on January 10th when they reconvene for the new year.  We need 1/3 of SC House to vote to sustain the governor’s veto so we can stop this agency before it gets created!

Please contact your Representative and tell him or her to sustain the governor’s veto on S211, the I-95 Corridor Authority Act.

Thanks for all you do!

Let me know what your Representative says! I am keeping score.


Best Regards,

Talbert Black, Jr.
Interim State Coordinator
Campaign for Liberty

P.S. Remember, in order to stop this further increase in the power and authority of our runaway legislature, contact your State Representative today and tell him or her to sustain the governor’s veto of the I-95 Corridor Authority.

We must stop the creation of this new state agency that will be given almost unlimited authority and will be directed by the state legislature.

Contact your Representative today!

Original vote record for the I-95 Corridor Authority:

These members voted for the I-95 Corridor Authority:

Alexander, Allen, Allison, Anderson, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bannister, Barfield, Battle, Bingham, Bowen, Bowers, Brady, Branham, Brannon, Brown H.B., Brown R.L., Butler, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Dillard, Edge, Erickson, Forrester, Frye, Funderburk, Gambrell, Gilliard, Hardwick, Harrell, Harrison, Hart, Hayes, Hearn, Herbkersman, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, King, Knight, Loftis, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, Mitchell, Moss D.C., Moss V.S., Munnerlyn, Murphy, Neal J.H., Neal J.M., Neilson, Ott, Parker, Parks, Pinson, Pitts, Rutherford, Sabb, Sandifer, Sellers, Skelton, Smith G.M., Smith J.E., Smith J.R., Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Tallon, Thayer, Toole, Tribble, Jr, Weeks, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams

These members were present but didn’t vote for or against:

Agnew, Anthony, Bikas, Brantley, Brown G.A., Chumbly, Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Govan, Hiott, Howard, Limehouse, McCoy, McEachern, Stringer, Willis

These were members were absent and didn’t vote:

Hixon, McLeod, Merrill, Pope, Vick

These two were not elected at the time of the vote:

Putnam, Southard

Those not listed voted against the I-95 Corridor Authority.

Thursday, November 03, 2011

On Display at The University of South Carolina

Mary Boykin Chesnut’s diary offers a first-person view of the Civil War from the upper reaches of Southern society. She details what it was like to sit atop a house in Charleston, S.C., and watch the shelling of Fort Sumter, and, later, what it was like in Chester, S.C., to receive news of Robert E. Lee’s surrender at Appomattox, with “the Elite of the Confederacy — going and coming — and when night comes … more beds are made on the floor of the landing place. …The whole house is a bivouac.’ Read More
The original diary is housed in Columbia, this is perhaps the best resource for a first person experience of the War from start to finish.  Anyone that has never read the words of Mary Boykin Chesnut has missed an experience.

Monday, October 31, 2011

SPARTANBURG COUNTY, S.C. -- The Spartanburg County Sheriff is known for speaking his mind, and at a news conference on Monday, he didn't hold back his anger and frustration after a woman was attacked in a park over the weekend.
[…]
He said Lance should not have had the right or opportunity to "violate a good, upstanding woman."

[…]
Wright said, "It's too bad someone with a concealed weapons permit didn't walk by. That would fix it." He said people are tired of doing the right thing and criminals getting away with their actions.

[…]
He encouraged women to walk in groups, and he ended by saying again, "I want you to get a concealed weapons permit. Don't get Mace. Get a firearm." (from WYFF)
My favorite quote from the good sheriff...gun control is, "Is when you can get you barrel back on the target quick. That’s gun control." We need more sheriffs around that understand basic rights and responsibilities.  The county sheriff under common law is the last and best defense to the peace and safety of the citizenry. We need more men like this in South Carolina.

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Three and Twenty Fire Department receives $190,000 grant



— The Three and Twenty Fire Department is soon going to have a brand new tanker.
Sen. Jim DeMint’s office recently announced that the fire department would be receiving a $190,000 grant from the Department of Homeland Security’s Assistance to Firefighters program. The fire department will also chip in another $10,000, according to Three and Twenty Fire Department volunteer fire Chief Tommy Keaton.

On the face of this one might say “good deal”, I mean after all who does not like fire trucks.  The fact that this volunteer fire department sits just a couple miles from the home that I own ought to make me feel better, yet it does not.

I have to ask myself a few questions:

What portion of the US Constitution authorizes, empowers or enables the Federal government with the authority, right or responsibility to fund local fire departments?

How was it that we survived in this country for 220 or so years without a Homeland Security department – how insecure the homeland must have been with fires burning unchecked and all manner of chaos abounding?


This story is but a microcosm of something larger and more sinister.  Think of it, $190k here, $200k there, no wonder we pay so much in taxes, no wonder our Federal government is so large and bloated.  Consider for a moment that the Federal government stole (yes I said stole because that is essentially the definition of someone that takes money with the threat of violence if you do not pay) 1% less from the citizens of South Carolina.  Do you not suppose that the folks in Anderson living around Three and Twenty could not support their fire department?  I suspect that the money saved in the pockets of the people would far exceed $190k, the county could raise taxes just a bit and the citizens could keep the balance – no need to fund a Federal government middle man.

This sort of story is absurd really, and the Powedersville Post should be called to account for not reporting the story in its entirety – this is not a happy story, this is money taken from the citizens by the government and then parceled out as some faceless agency saw fit.  Jim DeMint is no less guilty here – instead of acting as the hero that brought money home he ought to fight to keep it in the pockets of those that earned it in the first place.

A local community does not need the Federal government to help put out fires!

Technorati Tags:

Puppy Spotted On Boxcar Rescued, Finds New Home in South Carolina

LIBERTY, S.C.-- A black Labrador puppy has a new home in South Carolina after being rescued from the top of a freight train.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/26/puppy-spotted-on-boxcar-rescued-finds-new-home-in-south-carolina/#ixzz1cJ7KfBTp
 
Not all news is bad news!

Saturday, December 22, 2007

Lakota Nation

On 20 December 2007 the Lakota Nation took the first steps toward reclaiming their independence - we should all be inspired and provide support and prayers.

Read More

Saturday, December 01, 2007

South Carolina For Ron Paul

I am a native son of South Carolina. I am a Christian, a father and an active duty military officer and I support Ron Paul for president. I do not make this claim of support lightly - I have not fully supported any candidate since Ronald Reagan (and I was young then). To be certain I liked the ideas of Pat Buchanan and Alan Keyes but each of those elections were different. Different in that enough of the polity was not sufficiently upset to actually accept a solution other than the option offered up by the party bosses. Look at the poll numbers and contribution amounts right now - he traditional base of the Republican party is fractured and confused. Many know that things have gone awry but don not yet know where to turn for solutions.

Ron Paul is the answer, he is the only real conservative in the race. He is the only man that stands true to principles that our South Carolina ancestors would be proud to associate with. He is the only man running that a Christian of true conscious can vote for.

I know that those associated intimately with the party machine fear and disdain Paul - he exists outside of the system. The Republican Party itself supported a recently converted democrat (and liberal) against Dr. Paul in 1996 in a congressional election. This says much more about Ron Paul's commitment to stand firmly on his principles than it does of the wisdom of the party leadership. If you are one of those hard working party loyalist here in SC that believe that Paul is an outsider I ask that you consider what it really means to be a conservative and measure Paul against that - not against silly notions of "electability", pragmatism and loyalty to some notion of corporate fidelity. You know, or should know that at this stage of the game, with Paul's record of donations and support that he is far ahead of where Ronald Reagan was in 1979. Paul is electable, don't believe anything to the contrary.

Folks say Ron Paul is a contrarian - I say he is just principled. Anyone that observes politics knows full well that is ever there is a vote in Congress with only one dissenter - that is Ron Paul. He has been called Dr. No for this very reason - he alone seems to understand or care that the legislation that Congress passes must adhere to the guidelines set forth in the Constitution. No matter how "good" of an idea that comes up, Dr. Paul will not and never has supported any program not specifically authorized in the Constitution. Why is this important? Good ideas and running us broke but more importantly a government that does not follow its highest law is not a legitimate government at all.

Consider this, Ron Paul has
  • never voted to raise taxes.
  • never voted for an unbalanced budget.
  • never voted to raise congressional pay.
  • never taken a government-paid junket.
  • never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
  • voted against regulating the Internet.
  • not participated in the lucrative congressional pension program.
What would he do as President?
  • let Americans keep more of their own money.
  • end the IRS.
  • stop the central bankers’ “inflation tax.”
  • stop unconstitutional spending leading us to bankruptcy.
  • stop the financial dependency on China, Saudi Arabia, and other foreign governments.
  • oppose trade deals and groups that threaten American Independence (incl. the UN, GATT, NAFTA, NAU, WTO, CAFTA, ICC).
  • protect our privacy and stop the national ID card.
  • protect our constitutional rights and end the “Patriot” Act.
  • secure our borders and end illegal immigration.
  • end “birthright” citizenship for illegal aliens.
  • bring our troops home from no-win “police actions.”
This is all we really should want a president to do. We do not need any more men with "good ideas" related to programs they believe will solve all of our problems. Honestly, can any decent, right-thinking person think of anything the government really does efficiently or effectively? If you understand the Constitution and the specific delegated powers and responsibilities our states bestowed upon the federal government can you honestly say that you truly want anyone to propose that the central government do any more? Is anyone that proposes a departure for our law, our Constitution really a conservative or are they rather a progressive (or possibly worse)?

These are weighty issues, Americans have become accustomed to hearing politicians propose sweeping programs to solve problems (real and imagined). Many of us have come to believe this is the role of our federal government - it is simply not so.

The most beautiful thing about Dr. Paul is that he understands that most of the issues that the federal government currently concerns itself with belong at the state or county level. Abortion, education and dozens of other issues that clutter up the national dialogue are items we should be talking about and solving in our states - as the people of the states see fit. That my friends is freedom - that is the federal system that the founders envisioned and that is the notion of states' rights that our ancestors fought to preserve. We dishonor their memory, our own system of laws and future generations when we turn to slick politicians that say they can solve problems from Washington.

Just take a look at the recent Republican debates. Folks accuse Ron Paul of being out of step with the party. This is not true, he is on a completely different frequency than the other six candidates and this is obvious. It is impossible to debate with someone when you do not agree on fundamental issues. Paul holds that the very premise of the Federal government doing anything not specifically authorized by the Constitution is wrong and should be stopped immediately. The other want to tweak the system just a bit. That is a fundamental divide - such a gulf that you cannot even agree enough to argue. Paul is not out of step with he party - some within the party (many in fact) have lost touch with traditional conservatism.

Google Ron Paul, visit his campaign site, read my other Ron Paul posts - whatever and however you do it inform yourself about the man. He is electable, he is the only conservative in the race and he is the best hop we have at the national level of restoring the Republic.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

The War of 1776 was a War of Secession

Argument: The American Revolution was not a War of Secession

Counter-Argument:

America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to "alter or abolish" that government and "to institute a new government." The word "secession" was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word "separation" instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists. (Secessionist No. 18)

Clearly the joint declaration of 13 colonies from Britain was nothing more than the exact sort of separation that political theorist eventually came to call secession. Virginia's declaration of Independence (secession) occurred before the July 1776 joint declaration. The colonies had existed in some cases for 150 years with certain rights and privileges and maintained de facto status as the representative government of the sovereignty of the people. These were acts of separation carried out by political bodies relying on the sovereignty of the people. It was secession.

There were acts of civil disobedience before the political declaration, there were incidents of mob violence and there was the distinct possibility that the war might have developed into an insurgency of the sort we are familiar with in the 20th and 21st centuries, but this did not happen.

Likewise this war cannot be properly termed a revolution, for revolutions seek to replace one government with another. The thirteen colonies acted independently in a joint manner to declare their separation from Britain, and then acted jointly in their newly independent status to create, give birth, to a new entity. There was not revolution, no intention to replace the current government - there was only the intention to separate, to seceded from Britain.