As I’ve grown older, learned more, and experience takes a toll on my philosophy, I have come to trust government less and less. I’m distrustful of all government, but particularly, I’m distrustful of the federal government of the United States because it is the most difficult to control. The government of the United States has become the distant, detached, self-important entity that the founders had hoped to avoid when writing the Constitution. Today, the government is a being in and of itself – in national security planning, steps are taken to ensure that the government is preserved. Elected officials and unelected bureaucrats take the position that it’s their job to do what they think is in America’s best interest whether the American people agree or not.

It is this type of behavior on the part of government that has led us into fighting two wars simultaneously that drain our national resources. It was this philosophy of governance that created the financial environment that led to our current economic crisis. In the current administration, nothing has changed, really. The political goals may be different, but the underlying philosophy of government remains – a philosophy that holds that government can ignore the electorate and disregard the Constitution if they feel doing so is “in the best interest of America.”

I couldn’t disagree more.

It was this recognition, that government is not really what it pretends to be, that led me to self-identify as a libertarian, which eventually led to my involvement with the Tenth Amendment Center. And it is this same realization that causes me to applaud WikiLeaks and the sunshine it has brought to American government.

I grew up Christian with a very specific moral code which had very specific standards of behavior. Of course, being human and a child, I didn’t feel the need to always obey our standards of behavior. Sometimes, (okay, a lot of times), what I wanted to do didn’t align with what I was supposed to do. So my parents and religious leaders told me a story about how I was always being watched by God and I had a guardian angel following me around with a book. And in that book, my angel wrote down all the bad things and good things that I did, and it was up to me to make sure that there were more good things in that book than bad, because one day I would be judged and the contents of that book, my life’s record, would be laid bare for all to see.

The government of the United States was instituted by men who held government to a certain standard of behavior. It was their belief that government should be instituted to protect the liberty of individuals, but it was also their realization that all governments are a monopoly of force and will tend to disregard liberty in pursuit of their own ends. Sometimes, (okay, a lot of times), what government wants to do isn’t what government is supposed to do. Realizing this, our founders protected the freedoms of speech and press believing that an interested, knowledgeable populous would follow the goings-on in government, writing it all down with the intention that government’s record would be laid bare for all to see, and judge.

Sometimes, the mainstream press does its job well calling government to account for its misdeeds, misleads, or outright lies. Other times, the press itself seems to be fooled by, or in collusion with, a government that just does what it wants. This is why movements like the Tenth Amendment Center rise up and become successful – because there will always be a group of people who see the inherent evil in centralized government and do all they can to keep it in check. And because I am one of those people, a Tenther, a Constitutionalist, and a lover of liberty, I cannot help but support the mission of WikiLeaks, which, according to their website is to foster and promote the freedom of information in an effort to keep governments open and transparent.

On the page dedicated to WikiLeaks’ most recent document dump of American diplomatic cables, I find this quote:

This document release reveals the contradictions between the US’ public persona and what it says behind closed doors, and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see what’s going on behind the scenes.

My sentiments exactly.

I’ve realized for some time now that the public persona of the United States is nothing like the closed door policy discussions. Our government talks openly of freedom, democracy and republican principles, but in reality, the United States is the largest sponsor of totalitarian regimes in the world. Our politicians pay homage to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but ignore them when they pass legislation designed to infringe on the principles and protected rights in those documents. That there are others out there, like WikiLeaks, who see the same thing as me, keeps hope alive.

WikiLeaks can be a powerful tool for the Tenth Amendment movement. It gives us undeniable sources showing the hypocrisy of our federal government and provides impetus for local activism designed to rein in a federal leviathan that’s out of control. We, along with WikiLeaks and other pro-transparency movements, can be the federal government’s guardian angel – God knows it needs one – because it just keeps on doing whatever it wants.

Roger Prather [send him email] is the Communications Coordinator for the Massachusetts Tenth Amendment Center.

I have either been involved in or closely observed some level of government for almost ten years. In that time I have studied a series of local, county and state government entities, as well as an array of government public trusts.

I have spent a good deal of time listening to those groups argue about why they needed to continue receiving taxpayer largesse, need more taxes and fees, or want approval for new debt spending. I cannot recall one single time when a representative of any government group admitted to having too much money and suggested that the money be returned to the taxpayers from whom it was taken.

A naive person who did not maintain a healthy sense of skepticism would quickly adopt the point of view that almost all elements of government are terribly underfunded and much good would be accomplished with higher taxes and more debt spending.

Those who advance the notion of more government spending usually do so in a smooth and professional manner but every once in a while, a bureaucrat mistakenly reveals the true state of affairs. This was illustrated when I recently attended a meeting in which a group government officials listened to a very professional presentation by a representative of a government entity. The presentation communicated the need for money faced by the agency and was not unlike any number of similar presentations I have heard over the years.

Following his sales pitch, the presenter introduced to the group a high ranking official in his agency. Apparently unaware that a few state representatives where in the room, that official announced that he had been very busy lately because his agency was nearing the end of its fiscal year and his boss had apparently discovered a few extra hundred thousand dollars and had tasked him with quickly spending the money before the fiscal year expired. After all, the agency wouldn’t want elected officials to discover they had overfunded the agency, and certainly the agency did not want to run the risk of facing reduced funding.

To hear a high ranking official make this comment was shocking in and of itself, especially following the recently concluded sales pitch of his subordinate. However, what I found to be the most discouraging was the reaction of the audience. Instead of expressing shock or disgust at this obvious waste of taxpayer dollars, several of the government officials met the comments with applause and laughter.

Their reaction created the distinct impression in my mind that those who celebrated these comments support taking from the taxpayer even when it is unnecessary to do so. This speaks to the fact that they no longer consider their positions to be positions of trust in which their foremost duty is to guard the taxpayers’ money.

Incidents like this illustrate the importance of tax reduction and much greater transparency. To this end, I look forward to drafting and sponsoring an aggressive schedule of legislation during the upcoming session that both cuts spending and brings about greater transparency than ever before. The taxpayers must have the easy ability to see how, where and when the government bureaucrats are spending our money.

Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie, represents House District 31, which encompasses all of Logan County and a portion of northern Edmond. Murphey also owns and operates WebTeks CMS. He may be reached via e-mail at jason.murphey@okhouse.gov.

More specifically, The American Freedom Agenda Act would

• bar the use of evidence obtained through torture
• require that federal intelligence gathering is conducted in accordance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
• create a mechanism for challenging presidential signing statements
• repeal the Military Commissions Act, which, among other things, denies habeas corpus to certain detainees
• prohibit kidnapping, detentions, and torture abroad
• protect journalists who publish information received from the executive branch
• ensure that secret evidence is not used to designate individuals or organizations with a presence in the U.S. as foreign terrorists.

None of these were constitutional in the first place, and all are morally repugnant to the ideals of a free society. There is evidence of strong support for ending each of these individually, but no one in government seems to have the courage to do anything about it.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, had the courage to introduce legislation to end all of it. No one on either side of the aisle has done anything close.

I was browsing around the net looking for people who were writing about this big news, and came across an article on DailyKos.com (the hotbed of Democratic bloggers online) – which simply gave the text of the legislation and asked people to support it:

Please contact your Rep and ask for them to support this Resolution that has been introduced in the House today. The details of the Act are under the fold.

This didn’t get much traction on Kos – which I thought was odd, because it was a call to repeal so much of what the Bush administration had instituted over the last 6 years.

In fact, reading the comments was even worse – of the few posted, there were two that were downright hostile to the bill – not because it was a bad bill – but because it was introduced by Ron Paul, a Republican.

Here’s a comment by “Marcus Tullius”

Instead of supporting Ron Paul’s bill, I’d like to see the Dems propose their own.

And another:

I do not plan to help Ron Paul make political points. Imo, the Majority needs to put forward a bill proposing essentially the same thing. Couple of reasons why.

First, it denies R’s the ability to say that they are the party advocating a restoration of the rule of law. I aim to kill their party, and helping R sponsored bills pass is not on my list of shit to do right now.

Second, it requires any R that would support to vote against his/her party, and his/her president. That’s helpful because it further splinters their party, and it weakens the president.

So, to my mind, the only solution is a Dem sponsored bill. And they need to propose one, imo.

Although no one in his party has introduced legislation that’s even remotely similar – and although he supports the repeal of these awful laws, he won’t support it unless it’s been done by a Democrat.

It’s just this kind of attitude that, in my opinion, has gotten us to where we are now, and people like Marcus make me sick.

Marcus has no problem with torture, kidnapping, ending habeas corpus, and the like – and refuses to support the end of such activities, unless ended by a democrat.

I wonder how pervasive this kind of attitude is.

Party vs Freedom?

People like Marcus are happy to throw away your liberty, as long as it serves his party.

Now that’s a traitor if I ever saw one.