Thursday, December 17, 2009

Third Parties Don’t Work In America

i thought i'd share this article, "Third Parties Don’t Work In America", by Mark Metzger from the blog A Constitutional Right, along with my thoughts on the subject.

the writer, Mark Metzger, makes a good point about not trying to create a political party out of the non-partisan and grassroots Tea Party, which would potentially split the 2010 vote.  however, i believe he is somewhat off base on a couple of areas, which seems to be a common error among many Americans, according to what i've recently been hearing.


i agree with Mark's article in part.

  however, the primary reason why "third" parties in America are unsuccessful is not because they don't represent the mainstream ideal -- that's certainly an issue, but not the primary one.

after being involved in political activism within the LP for a while (i am no longer), i discovered that it is the Plurality Voting system which is mostly to blame for only allowing for a 2-party political system.

if America changed its voting system to Range Voting (aka: Score Voting), it would allow for multiple parties and/or independents to compete on a ballot, because there would no longer be a "wasted vote syndrome" which coerces people to vote for the "lesser of two evils".

on another note, i feel strongly that if the Tea Party focuses merely on "conservatizing" the Republican Party, the movement will turn out to be a complete failure.

the "left/liberal - right/conservative" political landscape is a complete deception: being ALWAYS liberal or ALWAYS conservative does NOT maximize liberty.

i believe the Tea Party should rather concentrate on attracting more activists who seek Constitutionally limited and accountable government.

in the effort of reforming government in that way through the legislature, the Tea Party should encourage those activists who wish to run for a political office to do so strategically in whatever race makes sense, regardless of the "political banner" under which they run.

if over time the Tea Party becomes large enough to potentially displace one of the duopoly parties, then it should consider not converting to a political party, but spin off a political party so that the heartbeat of the "Tea Party" remains non-partisan and grassroots.

however, if the Tea Party decides to continue playing the "left/liberal-right/conservative" political polarization game which has been played now for perhaps a century, then we can look forward to more of the same of what we have grown to expect in "Neo-American" government by the Neo-Cons AND Neo-Libs.

elaborating slightly...

because of Plurality Voting which leads to a 2-Party system, Mark is correct in saying that "Third Parties Don't Work In America".

the ONLY way to make such a massive change in the political landscape is to grow a new party large enough to DISPLACE one of the current duopoly parties and then take the place of it.  

i believe this CAN happen, but i doubt it can happen very soon, or by the 2010 election.

right now, the Tea Party seems to be fractured into camps which differ a bit too much in not only direction, but perhaps more importantly, focus.

in one faction, we have folks who are longing for more "Conservatives" to rally and reform the GOP.  in another we have what i might call "Constitutionists" or "BIG TENT Libertarians" who want to do the same.  then in yet another we have these Constitutionists who don't play the political polarization game and long to start a new party.

whichever strategy the movement decides to take, it has first got some serious decisions to make about its focus.  

it's going to take a LOT of Americans to drastically alter the political landscape, and therefore in order to do so we must find a common denominator of general consensus which WILL reach the mainstream ideal (as Mark put it).

does the Tea Party want to play the same political polarization game which has been going on in America for far too long?

seems to me, the real heart of the movement belongs NOT to "Conservatives", but to "BIG TENT Libertarians" who seek Constitutionally limited and accountable government.

keeping the Tea Party non-partisan keeps the message of liberty in focus.  as soon as the movement decides to play the political polarization game, it loses its focus, and therefore loses its heart -- a cause with no heart is no cause at all.

by now we should all know this to be true.  most of us have seen the difference between a REAL Tea Party and one which has been usurped by partisans.

so before the Tea Party decides it has enough solidarity of focus to step into the American political duopoly system, it had better come to a consensus on what its focus really is.


bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth • • ∞Liberty 
infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist

Sunday, November 15, 2009

April 15th Tax Day STRIKE!

i just created a NEW NON-Partisan Facebook group in hopes of helping to better organize an annual April 15th Tax Day STRIKE which will get MORE mainstream media attention NATIONALLY!

i've already invited all my Facebook friends and posted a link to download the most recent version of the Tax Day STRIKE flier i created, along with my, i think excellent, idea for getting MAJOR mainstream media attention NATIONALLY next April 15th, in hopes of educating more Americans about our rights and powers, according to the founding fathers:

"V" Across America!

if we could get the Tea Party on board with this, along with all the other non-partisan groups who are part of the PEACEFUL American Liberty Revolution, i think it would be a MAJOR pivotal point in the overall movement.

as the American Founding Fathers emphasized, in order to maintain LIBERTY the Federal Government NEEDS to FEAR We the People!  by using the V costume, it sends a STRONG message about this truth while remaining peaceful in our protests, and simultaneously reminds government of the potential future civil war ahead if it continues along the course of tyranny.

ALSO, not everybody need be dressed as V.  the mere fact that some Americans will attend this NATIONAL event all across America as V and others won't is perfect -- it shows that "normal" Americans also support the mandate for LIMITED government according to the Constitution!

so if you fancy the idea, please join the Facebook group and invite all your Facebook friends to do likewise and let's go VIRAL!  and while we're being liberty advocates, let's have FUN with this! in liberty,


bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth • • ∞Liberty
infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist

Friday, October 30, 2009

No Change - Just More of the Same!

i'm sure everyone will be getting copies of the following emails being distributed around the internet. well, you guessed it folks, they are simply more lies, part of the greater deception which is tearing America to shreds in a system designed to perpetuate a false dichotomy of the "political right & left".

it's RUBBISH folks -- it's a DECEPTION -- WAKE UP! the real battle is not over the X axis, but the Y:

if the People are going to be truly active against tyranny, we have to stop falling into the trap of "political partisan folly" and simply address the real problem. paramount is the complete lack of a Constitutionally limited government and accountability when government violates the LAW!

rather than attempting to blame the new First Lady for following the apparent precedent of having an unreasonably large number of attendants, these emails should point out that the new administration is continuing in the footsteps of the previous ones in bureaucracy, waste, and corruption.

for details on sources regarding the apparent modus operandi:

so again, no change, but more of the same: Republican & Democrat bureaucrats alike -- all authoritarian destroyers of America.

too bad these emails are created and then propagated without being confirmed, for they merely serve to decease the credibility of the non-partisan American patriots who opposes government waste and corruption and are striving to do something about it.

the assertion that Democrats are foolish and Republicans are wise is such a deception among Americans. when will We the People wake up? based on our track record, apparently never!

if you are one who favors an increase of liberty in America, then consider dispensing with advocating one anti-American political party over the other anti-American political party and begin advocating LIBERTY itself!


bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth • • ∞Liberty 
infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist

two erroneous emails:

Talk about change!

First Ladies do have assistants.

Michelle Obama : twenty-two !!!!!!!!!!!!
Laura Bush : one
Hillary Clinton : three
Jackie Kennedy : one

First Lady Requires More Than Twenty Attendants! July 7, 2009 Dr. Paul L. Williams

"In my own life, in my own small way, I have tried to give back to this country that has given me so much," she said. "See, that's why I left a job at a big law firm for a career in public service, " Michelle Obama

No, Michele Obama does not get paid to serve as the First Lady and she doesn't perform any official duties. But this hasn't deterred her from hiring an unprecedented number of staffers to cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession.

Just think Mary Lincoln was taken to task for purchasing china for the White House during the Civil War. And Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary. How things have changed!

If you're one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of Ms Michelle are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by John Q. Public

1. $172,200 Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)
2. $140,000 Frye, Jocelyn C. (Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Policy And Projects for the First Lady)
3. $113,000 Rogers, Desiree G. (Special Assistant to the President and White House Social Secretary)
4. $102,000 Johnston, Camille Y. (Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications for the First Lady)
5. $100,000 Winter, Melissa E. (Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff to the First Lady)
6. $90,000 Medina , David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
7. $84,000 Lelyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
8. $75,000 Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)
9. $70,000 Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Projects for the First Lady)
10. $65,000 Burnough, Erinn J. (Deputy Director and Deput y Social Secretary)
11. $64,000 Reinstein, Joseph B. (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
12. $62,000 Goodman, Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator for the First Lady)
13. $60,000 Fitts, Alan O. (Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)
14. $57,500 Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
15. $52,500 Mustaphi, Semonti M. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary to The First Lady)
16. $50,000 Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special Assistant for Scheduling and Traveling Aide to the First Lady)
17. $45,000 Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
18. $43,000 Tubman, Samantha (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)
19. $40,000 Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
20. $36,000 Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant to the Social Secretary)
21. $35,000 Bookey, Natalie (Staff Assistant)
22. $35,000 Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)

(total = $1,591,200 in annual salaries)

There has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life. One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense, when even;

• Hillary Clinton only had three;
• Jackie Kennedy one;
• Laura Bush one; and
prior to Mamie Eisenhower, social help came from the President's own pocket.

Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One to Europe .

Copyright 2009 Canada Free Press.Com

Yes, I know, The Canadian Free Press has to publish this because the USA media is too scared they might be considered racist. Sorry America SICKENING.........ISN'T IT?

— — —

Subject: Why does Michele Obama need 24 people working for her?

Is she abusing her power? How many are White? How many are Black? Any of Obama's relatives working for her? Is this a FORM OF WELFARE?

Does it really cost American Tax Payers about $1,750,000?

Does Michele Obama know that Americans are losing their Jobs and Homes? I know people that can not afford to buy food. I always thought that the White House looked after The American people!

Soon after the minor brouhaha erupted, looked into the matter and discovered that there are 16 White House staffers with the term "first lady" in their job title, along with eight additional staffers who also provide support to Michelle Obama, bringing the total number of paid first lady aides to 24, two more staffers than the number noted in the aforementioned chain email circulated by Obama critics. Michelle Obama's press secretary, Katie McCormick Lelyveld, confirmed that 24 was an accurate count of staffers working for the current first lady.

So just what does a staff of 24 do for Michelle Obama? Well, for starters there are the 32,000 pieces of mail that have flooded the East Wing since Michelle Obama took occupancy in January, but the main official duty of the first lady is to tend to the care and maintenance of the White House and its seemingly endless social functions. Of course some first ladies, like Michelle Obama, maintain a higher profile than others, and with that comes the need for people to help write speeches, arrange travel and security details, handle media inquiries, etc. About the myriad tasks and responsibilities handled by White House staffers, Anita McBride, Laura Bush's former chief of staff, recently said, "There's never enough people to do the amount of work that has to get done."

The Patriot from Florida.....October 30, 2009.


Monday, October 26, 2009

When the LIE is just not good enough...

... make it even more deceptive!
but i must say that this one takes the cake -- "competitive option"? how stupid do these clowns think we are?
how is it possible for any private market to compete with the federal government which has a seemingly endless supply of money? (money that belongs to We the People and also to our children for generations to come.)
perhaps a large faction of Americans have been so deceived by their public education indoctrination to go on thinking that Pelosi is correct in saying that taxpayers won't foot the bill for socialized health care, but even the most hardcore Neo-Libs will generally buckle when confronted with the truth of the matter that we all must share in such a burden.
therefore, right in step with previous such deceptive titles of Amerikan legislation as the USA PATRIOT ACT, No Child Left Behind, and Pick-Your-War-On-Anything-Having-No-Victory-Conditions, i presume We the People should simply take it as granted that whatever bills submitted for Congressional review mean exactly opposite as what their titles suggest.
thank you, all you bureaucrats for being so predictable!
bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth •∞Liberty
- infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist
(moved to so comment by the following article)

Pelosi: Health care 'public option' needs new name

(AP) – 56 minutes ago

SUNRISE, Fla. — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says a government-sponsored public option for health care lives. But it may be going by a different name.

In an appearance at a Florida senior center Monday, the Democratic leader referred to the so-called public option as "the consumer option." Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat, appeared by Pelosi's side and used the term "competitive option."

Both suggested a new moniker might get them past any lingering doubts among the public, consumers and competitors.

Pelosi says the term has been misrepresented and creates the impression that taxpayers will foot the bill for health care. Wasserman Schultz says she expects the speaker to give the new wording a test drive when she returns to Washington.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Finally A Sensible Gun Registration Plan That Will Work

a savvy twist on sensible gun registration -- i love it! make the non-gun owners pay their fair share!
bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth •∞Liberty
- infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist
Finally A Sensible Gun Registration Plan That Will Work
Vermont State Rep. Fred Maslack has read the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as Vermont 's own Constitution very carefully, and his strict interpretation of these documents is popping some eyeballs in New England and elsewhere. Maslack recently proposed a bill to register "non-gun-owners" and require them to pay a $500 fee to the state. Thus Vermont would become the first state to require a permit for the luxury of going about unarmed and assess a fee of $500 for the privilege of not owning a gun. Maslack read the "militia" phrase of the Second Amendment as not only affirming the right of the individual citizen to bear arms, but as a clear mandate to do so. He believes that universal gun ownership was advocated by the Framers of the Constitution as an antidote to a "monopoly of force" by the government as well as criminals. Vermont 's constitution states explicitly that "the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State" and those persons who are "conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms" shall be required to "pay such equivalent." Clearly, says Maslack, Vermonters have a constitutional obligation to arm themselves, so that they are capable of responding to "any situation that may arise." Under the bill, adults who choose not to own a firearm would be required to register their name, address, Social Security Number, and driver's license number with the state. "There is a legitimate government interest in knowing who is not prepared to defend the state should they be asked to do so," Maslack says. Vermont already boasts a high rate of gun ownership along with the least restrictive laws of any state .. it's currently the only state that allows a citizen to carry a concealed firearm without a permit. This combination of plenty of guns and few laws regulating them has resulted in a crime rate that is the third lowest in the nation. "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." This makes sense! There is no reason why gun owners should have to pay taxes to support police protection for people not wanting to own guns. Let them contribute their fair share and pay their own way!

Thursday, October 22, 2009


OK folks, here's an apparently new wonderful tyrannical law created by this General Assembly of NC, Session 2009! (details below my signature.)
i'm not entirely sure whether or not these NC State House & Senate email addresses actually go to the inboxes of "our representatives", but i am BCC'ing this message to one of them who i know more personally in hopes they will make sure our voices are heard.
KEEP IT UP NC General Assembly!
how long do you people running ruining our country and protecting destroying our freedoms think it's going to be before you provoke an all out second American revolution and are all hung for treason for blatantly usurping our Creator-given unalienable rights and violating the Constitution?
oh, i can figure that by continuing to gradually advance socialism & fascism (aka: tyranny) here a little and there a little, it will probably still take several more years before the indoctrinated public becomes that overwhelmingly fed up with over-regulation -- heck, your ilk of bureaucrats have twisted the very meaning of "regulate" when it was included in our Constitution at the onset of America's founding.
or do you really think it is possible to endlessly advance tyranny without your -- or your children/grandchildren -- ever suffering any repercussions from your actions at all? surely you cannot be that foolish, can you?
and i'm so very happy that due to your draconian legislation in all your wisdom, that our local law enforcement is spending so much of their recent energies in cracking down on such dangerous criminals such as this lady who cannot probably afford to open her own commercial shop and has been operating out of her car buying and selling gold & silver. oh boy howdy, can i sleep safer now!
you know, many oppressed citizens over the history of mankind have been deceived: it's not primary the law enforcement that is to blame for the horrid state of a nation when it has squandered its freedoms -- it is the self-serving bureaucrats in government to blame.
you need more money for your precious budgets which are bloated with pork and appropriations for all sorts of things outside of the proper role and jurisdiction of government, so you merely wield your mighty pen and with a simple stroke you enact a new law which warrants heavier and stricter taxation upon whatever group you might be able to get away with burdening so.
so no, i don't really fault our local law enforcement at all for carrying out the law -- i fault YOU who are by oath supposed to be protecting the liberties of Americans here in NC, and your anti-American partisan politics wherein your true allegiance lies!
if you didn't allow tyrannical laws to remain on the books -- like the forced annexation law which everyone loathes, apparently except for you bureaucrats -- people wouldn't view you as a bunch of deceivers and hypocrites!
you do know that is how the overwhelming majority of Americans view you, right? that is why there is generally such a low percentage of ALL Americans who turn out to vote. the majority of Americans know the nature of most politicians never changes. regardless, the way We the People view you is all up to YOU and the actions you take while you are holding office.
i'm obviously thoroughly disgusted in hearing that you have now chosen to steal from those who have decided to venture into the gold & silver markets -- people who thought it wise to deal with REAL coins rather than the fraudulent funny money ILLEGALLY issued by the ILLEGAL Federal Reserve.
that's OK, those who know the TRUTH also know that liberty can not be destroyed.
BTW, perhaps you should also know that we in the greater liberty movement have true American allies in government as well as you tyrants, in both the military and law enforcement, who take their oaths of office to protect and defend Americans and our liberties from enemies foreign and domestic SERIOUSLY!
if you have not yet heard about them, you might want to do your homework: -- the Oathkeepers are on our side... that is the side of LIBERTY!
so you had better be careful how far into the reaches of tyranny you elect to wield your pens!
as always, in liberty...
bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth •∞Liberty
- infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist
(inspired to share upon having the following email conversation)

From: Asheville Daily Planet <>

Date: October 22, 2009 3:45:22 PM EDT

Subject: Re: Don't try to buy precious metals without a permit!


Yes, I've talked with dealers who have talked to the APD about this new law that, somehow, nobody knew about.

I also have a copy of the statute, which requires a $180 permit and nobody's sure — including the APD — of how much the also-mandated $10,000 surety bond costs.

This is from the lengthy document General Assembly of North Carolina, Session 2009. It is listed as Section Law 2009-482, House Bill 1637 as starts as follows:

"An act to modernize the record keeping of precious metals purchases by dealers, to subject all dealers in precious metals to similar record-keeping requirements, to increase precious metals permitting fees, to require that a criminal history record check be conducted on employees of precious metals dealers, and to make various other changes to the precious metals permitting statues...."

The upshot is that the AC-T story left out, according to the ADP, that the Weaverville woman was buying scrap gold and silver from her car. If she had had a shop, which likely would have been licensed, they would have warned her or not chosen to make an example of her as a warning to others. However, even the coin shop owners often don't have this permit and the bond, so they are scrambling.

The APD officer told a reliable area coin dealer that this crackdown — only on buying and selling scrap precious metals (and not coins at this moment) — is happening because the government needs money and sees this as a loophole that can be taxed. The APD officer said everyone should expect this to be a growing trend, eventually covering the buying and selling of everything.

Don't breathe too hard, either, Bernard, because there next may be an oxygen tax. Do you have a permit to breathe?

I knew you would be particularly interested in this because all of the coin dealers with whom I have spoken about this feel it is a textbook example of creeping government intrusion. Also, some local dealers think the government especially wants to discourage activity in gold, silver and other precious metals because it wants people to be totally dependent on fiat currency, which it controls and ultimates is — or will be — worthless.

You ought to invite this woman to a Liberty Asheville or LP Buncombe meeting, or both. It'd be intriguing to hear her comments — and have a Q&A. If she can't or won't come, it'd be interesting for LA or LP to host an APD detective to explain what's going on ... I think everyone would get a kick out of this.


On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:19 PM, bernard b carman wrote:

i would presume this has more to do with the mandate of government, over what would otherwise be a free market to do business, that individuals who wish to practice any kind of business, including purchase and resale, have the appropriate permit in which to do so, because We the People no longer have such a right to do business freely without government "regulation".

however, without seeing the actual State statute, i can only presume this is the case. perhaps there is something extra regulatory regarding precious metals.


bernard baruch carman


On Oct 20, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Asheville Daily Planet wrote:


Did you read this story in the Oct. 17 edition of the Citizen-Times?

Thought it might be of great interest to you. Everyone with whom I've discussed this is stunned. They feel this is a major infringement on personal freedom. Nobody I know has such a permit, or knew that it was required.

Please advise your position(s).


Woman charged in sting involving precious metals

A Weaverville woman was charged by Asheville police on Oct. 16 with trying to buy precious metals online without a permit.

Posing as jewelry sellers, Asheville police responded to a Craigslist ad in which the woman had posted her interest in buying any unwanted or broken jewelry, according to police.

Crystal Wiggins Laws, 35, was charged with fraud.

State law prohibits anyone to act as a dealer in the purchase of precious metals without getting a permit for the business from a local law enforcement agency.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Health Care Options? How About Let's Ask the Doctors! 8-)

gee, what a novel idea! if we want to know what is wrong with the current health care system, why the hell would we ask politicians and lawyers?
how much good have politicians and lawyers done to fix anything? yet, like a bunch of foolish children with no wisdom whatsoever, We the People continue to look for answers from them!
i'm not necessarily a fan of Glenn Beck, primarily because i trust media personalities almost as little as politicians and lawyers, but he had a pretty good idea in getting a bunch of doctors (and med school students) together in a room and have a discussion about alternatives to socialized health care, and what we can expect from it if this administration elects to pass it:
if you are not already deceived into thinking that politicians and lawyers are looking out for your best interests, you will surely want to watch this.
i find it most interesting that the only individuals out of this group that think more government intervention will help solve the various current health care problems (which began with government intervention) were the "noobs" -- the overly optimistic med school students who are freshly out of several years of public education indoctrination who have never practiced medicine in the real world -- very telling indeed! 8-)
(i also found the satellite pictures of the arctic between Jan 2000 ~ May 2009 at the top of the page very interesting, but i won't comment on that at this point.)
bernard baruch carman
* * *
* * *
- seeker of truth / seeder of truth •∞Liberty
- infinity games ∞ infinity solutions ∞ audio/Mac specialist