Free Republic establishes alliance with the "Restore the Constitution" effort

FreeRepublic Alliance Links ^ | October 17, 2009 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

We are pleased to announce that FreeRepublic and Jim Robinson have established an Alliance Link to the Restore the Constitution effort, The Independent Movement for Constitutional Restoration (IAM-CR).

The premise for IAM-CR is simple:

We intend to amass a voting block of millions of Americans who are sworn to focus on Constitutional Principle first and foremost in their voting and who will vote for and elect the thousands of candidatires we find and enlist who are sworn to support fundamental Constitutional Principle.

We invite all members of FreeRepublic to review our twelve constitutional principles and then JOIN US and invite your family, friends, and neighbors to do likewise as we build this voting block all over the nation and attract candidates to us, or develop them from our own ranks at all levels of government.

Please review the list of candidates we have already attracted, who have sworn or affirmed that they will support those same principles and do all in their power to support and inact them in law if elected.

IAM-CR is not a political party or a PAC. It seeks no donations, fees, dues, or other funds. It only seeks the commitment to constitutional principle of its members and candidates from whatever persuasion.

All of the public demonstrations are good, and critical in showing the opposition the strength, determination, and numbers of those Americans who are awakening to the destruction of our Republic by abject socialists and marxists in our own government. IAM-CR does, and will will link to and promote those FreeRepublic, 912Project, TeaParty and other events directed to this end.

But until we actually elect candidates at all levels of government committed to the constitution and who swear to abide its fundamental principles...nothing will change.

That restoration of our Constitutional Republic, based on fundamental constitutional principle is what this effort is about...that is what FreeRepublic is all about...the largest and most effective site for conservative activism and news on the intenet. Jim Robinson's foresight and dedicated efforts over many years must be recognized for making that so, and we sincerely thank him and all those involved with FreeRepublic for that work, and for forming this alliance with our efforts in support of those same goals.

In this regard, our alliance could not be more natural.

In fact, IAM-CR was created by several long-time and well known freepers and a couple of other well-known patriots. Jeff Head (freeper Jeff Head), Neil E Wright (freeper Neil E. Wright), David C, Wright (freeper dcwusmc), Ward Dorrity (freeper noumenon), Matthew Bracken (freeper Travis McGee), Pastor Stephen Broden (seen often on Fox News, Glenn Beck, and Hannity, and who is himself one of our candidates for the US Congress), and David Hedrick (the disabled US marine who stood up to his congressman at the town hall in Washington state and who is also one of our candidates for US Congress) are all on the Advisory Board of this effort.

Please JOIN US and help us use the political process and our voting rights to rise up and take our country back and restore our constitutional republic.

[Jeff Head]

Great! Look forward to having you aboard Penelopesire! Please spread the word and remember, once you join, to join your state group so you can network with people in your state.

[444Flyer]

Bump

[BenLurkin]

bttt

[Bigg Red]

BTT

[Jeff Head]

Thank each of you for the BUMP! Please pass the word.

The more Americans who focus first and foremost on the constitution and constitutional principle first and foremost when they vote...the better our nation will be, and the more quickly we will take her back.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Yes, energy policy is one of many important issues that Congress needs to deal with intelligently and effectively. But it’s not a Constitutional issue. The ramifications of buying most of our key food additives from China are huge too, and potentially a national security issue, as the shipments could easily be used to distribute deadly biological agents all over the US very quickly. But food additives aren’t a Constitutional issue either.

[Jeff Head]

National defense is a constitutional imperative. The free market is a constitutional impertative because meddling in it is outside the realm of the federal government.

So, 1st, craft foreign trade policies that are geared towards maintaining our national defense and soveriegnty, and second, ensure that the free market is unfettered here on our own soil so that we can make use of the resource we have here to remain independent in this regard.

I believe constitutional candidates can meet both of those goals and do so within the framework of the constitution...in fact, I believe we must do so.

[dajeeps]

I applaud this effort as it seems like a great first step toward combatting the wave of socialism that has swept across our nation for decades.

I’ve read the principles at the provided link, and while I agree with the spirit of them, I have some reservations about the power of the Federal government, granted within the letter of the constitution, to aptly apply them. In my view, much of what has shaken our republic to its knees is the errosion of the spirit of 9th and 10th amendments and abuse of the “Commerce”, “General Welfare”, and “Necessary and Proper” clauses in Article II Section 8, allowing the Federal government to do just about anything it pleases, following any political wind. Such is the situation we find ourselves in now where the socialists desire to use this state in order to further their view of “good”, never mind that a right to health care and the Federal government’s power to provide it aren’t listed anywhere in the constiution at all. With all due respect, neither are many of the items on the list provided at the link.

This list seems to be more of a reactionary component the the Federal social engineering we’ve had foisted on us that we believe has erroded the very fabric of society more than it is a list of constitutional principles. My opion is that this reaction is directly related to the abuses of Federal power I’ve outlined above and it cannot be remedied by abuses of a different stripe, leaving the ultimate showdown between us and the socialists for another day. Until the ability of the Federal government to abuse its power and engineer society has been remedied, this struggle will continue and perhaps one day our republic will indeed completely collapse.

[Man50D]

We have a link to the platform of the GOP, which is a good platform. The problem is the candidates and leadership that depart from their own platform...not the ones who support those principles.

It's a contradiction to claim the party has a platform that isn't being followed. Any platform reflects the actions of those seeking office. If the platform is good then please explain how the RNC has made a six figure transfer of funds to the National Republican Campaign Committee so they can contribute to Dede Scozzafava's campaign in the NY-23 race knowing she supports abortion, voted for massive tax hikes, Democrat budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package. She has also embraced the socialist leaning working families Party, is close friends with ACORN Vice Chairperson Bertha Lewis. Scozzafava also supports the federal "card-check" legislation that would massively boost union rolls -- and Democratic voting rolls -- at the expense of rank-and-file workers' free choice.

This information can be confirmed in an article written by Michelle Malkin Upstate lib in Republican clothing

I fail to understand how you rationalize linking to an organization who endorses candidates with such strong socialist beliefs. How do you rectify this stark contradiction in your mind Jeff? I am very disappointed they are being supported by your site and FreeRepublic knowing these facts.

[Jeff Head]

The link is to the platform. There are many, many GOP candidiates who not only want to follow the platform, but who are doing so.

Getting them elected and finding more who will will only help that partiocularl party. We also link to other party platforms without endorsing the party per sey at all. Same with the GOP platform.

That is who and what we support within the GOP if they will come forward and take the oath we are requesting. The candidates we have listed have done that and so have our support.

There is no contradiction in that.

We will support candidates of whatever stripe who swear to uphold those principles we have listed and who swear beforehand to also uphold the constitution accordingly.

[Jeff Head]

Life, Liberty, Property, Defense (the 2nd Amendment), etc. are all constitutional issues. Other principles reflect the critical issues of the day where the government has already taken some role (mostly unconstitutional) in them and we have listed our stand on those principles and an appeal to gather constitutional candidates who will use constittuional principle to address them accordingly.

Those issues are out there...they exist...and they need to be addressed. We have stated our principles in terms of finding candidates who will address them accordingly and use the constittuion, and the very principles you have addressed and listed (ie the 10th amendment) to address them.

[Bob J]

Somthing effective.

[Lady Jag]

Well, that’s pretty specific.

[Bob J]

It’s a simple as I can make it. Decide out where you want to be, figure out where you are and then devise a plan on how to get from point A to B...realistically.

I’ve read the manifesto. Jeff wants to build a Christian org that is based on most of the same principles I’ve seen rattling around conservatism for 40 years and what has been talked about on this site for 10. The points are fairly clear but there are no specific goals, timetable or strategy on how to achieve it. What I find most alarming, besides the oath one is required to take, is it is mostly based on getting “the right” candidates into the election as opposed to changing the hearts and minds of the voters who will be doing all the voting.

I don’t see anything new, no fresh perspective, no creative gameplan. Most conservatives don’t understand how we got into the mess we’re in and if you were to tell them and layout the strategy for fixing it they would reject it because most don’t want to win, the want to whine and complain about how abused they are.

I’ll give you a hint. For 40 years conservatives have ceded every significant piece of ideological and propaganda apparatus and real estate to the libs. Liberals infiltrating the schools? HOME SCHOOL! Taking over the media? TURN OFF THE TV! California with it’s 52 electoral votes? LET IT DROP OFF INTO THE OCEAN! Moderates getting elected? RUN THE RINOS OUT OF TOWN! GOP not listening? VOTE 3RD PARTY!

Non politician conservatives may talk a good game and are full of bluster (MOLON LABE MOLON LABE!) but when it comes down to the important nuts and bolts of maintaining a modern ideological majority, which includes meeting the enemy at every confrontation, their first instinct is to run and hide.

So when you tell conservatives the first step is reversing the losses are to get the liberal ideology out of the classroom, balance the media and to quit automatically ceding whole sections of the country to the dems they realize how much work that will take, their eyes glaze over and they reach straight for the lazy hail mary pass...SARAH! SARAH! SHE’LL FIX ALL OUT PROBLEMS!

[Jeff Head]

Bob, nothing in the principles or the other documentation indicates that this is a "Christian" organization. It does refer to God-given rights and I do not apologize for that because it is a fundamental truth that our founders recognized and built the nation upon. So, does it refer to God-given rights and principles? Yes. Does it further differentaite? No.

Clearly Christians can and should feel at home in such an organization...but so should any other sincere people of reason and faith who love liberty and understand the foundational principles upon which it is based.

2nd. The entire effort is meant to focus the citizens of this country, regardless of stripe, on the constitution and on constitutional principles that are directed at the issues of the day, and are meant to be attacked from the ground up. We are not cedeing any ground...otherwise we would not be establishing chapters in all fifty states and the territories.

We know it will be a long haul, and we know it will require building our candidates and support at the grassroots level and giving equal import to the local, school board, county, district, state legislature levels, including local sheriffs and judges. We are seeking to build our support base and our camndidates at that level as well.

It took us a long time to get where we are, it will take us a long time to dig out of it.

Is this a perfect plan? no. But it is a plan and it an effort to get folks focused on the things that really matter and away from sterotype, charisma, hand-outs, PC/party mechanisms, social maipulation, etc.

I believe it can work (obviously), but in order for it to do so, a lot of people have to get involved with it and believe it too. That's what we are trying to do.

[S.O.S121.500]

BOOKbump

[Hiskid]

ping in case you hadn’t heard

[Bob J]

I don’t disagree with much at all in your “guiding principles”, that’s not my point.

You’re never going to get your preferred candidates elected until you change the hearts and minds of the voters who will elect them. (I’m assuming you’re going to go after districts that don’t normally elect politicians of your leanings, as all the opposite will do is shuffle the deck chairs). You thinkjust because you put up a candidate that signs your oath that the voters will elect them. Why? What keeps them from electing the tax and spend, big government, welfare mentality politicians (who are going to promise them a whole lot more goodies than your candidates) for the last 40 years?

If we’re going to change this country it can only be done by changing the mindset of the voters and that means first reforming the propaganda machine (schools, media, hollywood, etc.) that has put the opposing mindset in place.
Without that you may see limited success but by and large your candidates just won’t be elected because the voters won’t be inclind to vote for them.

Otherwise you’re just pushing a boulder up a hill only to see it roll back down on you.

I don’t want to make it look like I’m piling on your efforts. i’ve just seen to much of these kind of efforts start and then stall because they’re attacking symptoms and not the root causes of our problems.

But good luck. You’re a fine person and a patriot. I won’t post anymore on these threads about this org.

[Jeff Head]

The principle thrust of the effort is to get citizens to sign up who support these principles...and then support candidates who do likewise.

I believe we will elect candidates who support these principles as we build enough citizens in each district who do likewise.

I believe the people who are singing up in each district are the key to that...to educating and attracting more within their own spheres of influence.

So, in answer to your question, Do I believe that we will elect these candidates simply because they take the oath? The answer is no. We will elect them because we build a large enough voting block behind them who also support those principles.

That is the entire thrust of the effort, to get the citizens themselves focused on these principles first and foremost in their voting...and what the mission statement indicates from the get go.

[Bob J]

Well, you responded so I ‘m still on the thread.

Jeff, let me explain it as how I see what you’re doing. You’re rounding up and organizing the most conservative voters (and based on your “guiding principles” we’re talking the most ardent, hardcore conservatives...so conservative in their beliefs you make them take an oath to support each and every point in your platform) and your convincing them...TO VOTE FOR THE CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE.

Seriously, am I missing something here? These are people that would I would bet a lot of money on them voting for you’re preferred candidate anyway...without you’re guidance!
How have you made a differnce in the outcomes?

Jeff, when you come up with a plan that gets normally swing voters or even dem voters to take a look at and vote for your candidates, causing not only a change in the entire election dynamic but possibly swinging the outcome from defeat to victory, then you got me as a supporter and member.

Now maybe there is something in your plan I am missing and if you can point it out I’m ready to listen. But until then, to me, this is just another conservative feel good effort that is full of flowery rhetoric and good intentions but doesn’t move the ball down the field. At worst it may sap time, money and effort from other ventures that have a much greater ability to produce meaningful change.

Efforts to educate citizens and influence voters that normally wouldn’t vote for candidates who support your principles will go much farther in achieving a conservative ascendancy in America than banding together a bunch of people whose opinions and sensibilities are pretty much already set in stone.