The Money Masters are Ripping You Off

Add to iTunes

Michael Boldin and Jason Rink kick off the show talking about two new bills from Congress – HR347 and HR5 – the former on new “protest” laws and the latter on republicans pushing for mandates on the states in a big way while claiming to work on a repeal of part of Obamacare.

Jason Rink commenting on Special National Security Events, “These are events where the Secret Service are involved in any way.  You could have no knowledge that there is Secret Service present like at the Superbowl.  Even if you have no knowledge that the Secret Service is there, and after all, they are Secret Service.  This type of event is one where you have very limited options in exercising your free speech and protesting and it can be a Federal crime.

The first guest on the show was Pat Carmack – producer of the documentary, The Money Masters.


Two Views of the Constitution

There seems to be two streams of thought in this country as to what the Constitution is and means. These two thoughts are diametrically opposed to each other and that is where the difficulties and the conflicts begin, not just between political parties but even within them. The problem is most people do not understand that this basic philosophical difference is the root cause of our political problems.

Let’s backup first and look at what I and many others thought was a problem with our elected representatives; they were not taking their oath  to protect and defend the constitution seriously. I think now I was wrong. They do take their oath seriously and they believe they’re defending the constitution. Now, I know there are many of you starting to question my thinking when I make statement like that, especially after writing The Oath; but hear me out.

They are protecting their version of the constitution; okay, now you’re saying wait a minute there is only one US Constitution. Well technically you are right, but here is where the problem arises and this goes back to my opening statement. Something was said on the radio this morning on the way into work that caught my attention and it was this idea of two completely different concepts of what the Constitution is, and I believe this is what is causing the conflict. Well here is the problem, one view of the Constitution is it is a charter of rights, but the opposing view is it is a plan of government; these two thoughts are poles apart.


New Hampshire House passes resolution affirming power to nullify

CONCORD, N.H. (March 14, 2012) – Last week, the New Hampshire House passed a Tenth Amendment resolution asserting the states’ powers under both the U.S. and New Hampshire Constitution, and affirming the principles of nullificatio

HR25 passed on a voice vote and became House Session Law.  The House clerk will forward copies of the to the President Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Senate President Joe Biden and all members of the New Hampshire congressional delegation. Bill sponsor Daniel Itse says he also plans to send copies of the resolution to New Hampshire’s sister states.

HR 25 makes several assertions, among them that the federal government has no power to define or punish crimes except for those enumerated in the Constitution, treaties may not delegate powers not already given to Congress in Article 1 Sec. 8, and when the federal government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.

The final resolution upholds the principle of nullification, echoing the words of Thomas Jefferson in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798.


Missouri’s Senator Nieves standing up for your rights

Brian Nieves, State Senator from Missouri, recently appeared as a guest on Tenther Radio Episode 37. Nieves, who introduced Senate Bill 819  (Prohibits state enforcement of provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012) explained the bill as being, “probably not unlike some of the stuff that’s being filed in other parts of the United States, but basically it just says that this NDAA stuff is not going to work in the state of Missouri. The State of Missouri is going to stand up and say we are a sovereign state, we’re not going to have our constitutional rights violated by this out-of-control Federal Government, and the element of that NDAA act that we found most egregious is just simply not going to be enforced in the state of Missouri.”

As for President Obama signing the NDAA and allowing the Federal Government a huge new power – but then saying that his administration doesn’t have plans to use it – Nieves believes this to be perilous ground for the people of Missouri. “… even if he intends to hold to that, and not detain American citizens – the fact still remains that there is at least the chance that it could happen. And we can’t even allow there to be the chance.”

But despite passage of the Healthcare Freedom Act by vote recently, does Missouri have the backbone to stand up and say no to Washington D.C.? Senator Nieves replied with, “I think the people of Missouri certainly have the backbone to stand up to the Federal Government. Whether or not the Missouri Legislature has the backbone to do that – I’m not as confident in the Legislature as I am in the people of Missouri. And that’s why it’s good we’re getting the word out through these types of resources, so that the people can begin to stand up and demand that our Legislature do the right thing.”


Arizona anti-NDAA legislation moving closer to full passage

PHOENIX, Ariz. (March 14, 2012) – A bill blocking implementation of indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act and a resolution condemning those kidnapping provisions both passed out of Arizona House committees Wednesday

SCR1011 passed 8-0 out in the House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee, with one member absent. SCR1011 declares:

That the Members of the Legislature condemn sections 1021 and 1022 of the 2012 NDAA as they purport to repeal posse comitatus and authorize the President of the United States to use the armed forces of the United States to police American citizens, to indefinitely detain persons captured within the United States without charge until the end of hostilities as purportedly authorized by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, to subject persons captured within the United States to military tribunals, and to transfer persons captured within the United States to a foreign country or foreign entity.

The resolution still needs to pass out of the rules committee before moving on to a House Caucus for a second reading. If it passed that, it will proceed to the Committee of the Whole for debate and then on to a final vote.

SB1182 would prohibit any agency of the state from providing material support for or from participating in any way with the implementation of sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, Public Law 112‑81, against any citizen of the United States. It also passed out of the House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee by a 6-3 vote, keeping it on track for final House approval.


“Free the American West”: But western lands could trigger revolt

The Hill’s John Feehery asks the important question: Is this election about revolution or restoration? Since April, 2009 when Texas Governor Rick Perry chanted “ . . . states’ rights, states’ rights, states’ rights!!!” at the Alamo, it’s been on people’s minds. Perry, Gingrich, Santorum, Bachmann, Paul have tendencies.

Revolt needs philosophers like Ron Paul, distinguished supporters like Perry, passionate advocates like Sarah Palin, warrior ascetics like Alaska’s Joe Miller and even mad hatters like Glenn Beck. But most a revolt needs casus belli; a singular cause that bonds to purpose. Otherwise, there is no rebellion. There is an issue today that qualifies: Land.

“Whose land is it,” Connor Boyack, Director, Utah Tenth Amendment Center, asks in The Daily Caller? “Has the federal government become so arrogant as to claim ownership of the land over which it has jurisdiction? Put differently, does the United States of America exist to protect and defend the property of each individual living within its borders, or to own and control that property itself? This is not a theoretical question reserved for intellectual banter. It is a real question pondered often, especially by those in western regions where the majority of land is owned and regulated by the federal government. Although the federal government owns less than 10% of almost every eastern state, it owns large swaths of the West: 65% of the land in Utah, 83% of Nevada, 63% of Idaho, 45% of Arizona, 44% of California and similar percentages of the surrounding western states.”

We never consider it back east, but demographics bring it. Slightly more than one hundred years back the western regions were virtually empty, struggling for a purchase under a Comanche moon. Today, those who prioneered there might want to make their own determinations.


TSA’s nude body scanners are ineffective

by Lindsey Needham via

Jonathan Corbett, a scientist and engineer, recently exposed the inadequacies of the full body scanners used by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Not only do these machines invade our privacy, but they fail to detect metallic objects that traditional metal detectors would spot easily. Corbett asserts,

When the machines came out, we were told that the invasion on our privacy, doses of radiation, and trashing of our Constitution were necessary because the old metal detectors weren’t good enough.

So how does one get forbidden objects through these scanners? Sample images show that the scanners produce images of white bodies against a black background. As Corbett points out, metallic objects also turn up as black in these images, meaning they can fade into the background if strategically placed on one’s side.

Corbett put his theory to the test at multiple airports by sewing a side pocket into his shirt and carrying a sizable metal object inside of it. As the video shows, Corbett was able to pass through airport security with his metal object, proving that these invasive machines are not only a waste of money but a major risk to everyone’s security.


Your state CAN and MUST stop DC!

Want to stop unconstitutional “laws,” regulations…and mandates? Join us at Nullify Now! Philadelphia on March 31st. Learn how your state CAN and MUST stop DC.

Get all the info here:


GOOD NEWS! Recently, the Washington Times reported on the growing rebellion in state legislatures – “17 states have enacted laws rejecting parts of the Affordable Care Act.” They told us that this “could be hazardous to health care overhaul.”

They’re right. When enough states stand up and say NO, we the people can win.

Going to the federal government to fix problems created by the federal government is a failed policy. People are waking up to the fact that they not only CAN stop DC by rejecting their unconstitutional acts in state houses, but as James Madison told us in 1798 – it is their DUTY to do so.


Government Spying on Your Social Media

Last week a young college student approached me after class with a very disturbing concern. He had just been interrogated by the FBI for making a video three years ago of him exploding a fire cracker and placing the video on YouTube for others to see. He thought that it would be funny. During the three years since, and unbeknownst to him, the government had been monitoring his every behavior and presented to him, for his perusal, a file an inch thick of every event in his life including his grades from grade school.

If kids are monitored for such normal behavior (I used to set off fire crackers too but I did not put my doing so on the Internet) what can we expect next from our government which now violates the 4th Amendment to the Constitution with impunity? Monitoring our social media 24 hours a day? A new directive suggests that this is now to be common.

The National Operations Center (NOC), a part of The Department of Homeland Security, recently released its Media Monitoring Initiative giving itself permission to “gather, store, analyze, and disseminate” data on millions of users of social media, primarily Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. So far they appear less concerned with the information of the average Joe or Jane, although all is kept just in case, as they do with unmanaged journalists and bloggers. These are defined as “those who use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed,” such as myself. Targeted are those who post articles, comments, or other information to popular Web outlets.