Today marks the beginning of a series of articles that trace their roots to the human desire for freedom and progress that has enjoyed more success in the United States of America than in all of history or in any other country. The posting of these articles are being made possible by Jim Robinson and FreeRepublic. FreeRepublic and Jim Robinson reflect that desire and drive for freedom, independence and progress to the greatest extent possible. One can hope these articles produce their intended results and prove to eventually be part of the reason Jim Robinson created FreeRepublic.

The articles themselves provide some particularly important parts of history that have been overlooked, unreported or not well understood. And the articles show how particular individuals and groups can cooperate in order to catalyze results in ways that can exponentially increase political effects. Pooling the right facts and the right people is a compelling strategy to achieve specific goals. These pieces when pulled together and understood form a blueprint for how freedom-loving Americans can take our country back by restoring the Constitution and improving it. Together the various pieces come together to leverage conservative political power to a greater extent in America than has ever been possible. Defeating socialism and the socialists once and for all makes an economic Renaissance possible and it makes a Renaissance of freedom possible.

The Founders did the best they believed they could within the realm of doing what was politically possible at the time. It is no different today with regard to compromising principles with the idea that it is better to gain something at the sacrifice of not getting things exactly as they should be. Bipartisanship and compromise are considered politically necessary and the reality of the world. Without disagreeing, it should be apparent that if we could ever just get it right once, we would have a model that could serve as a standard that might eventually make the need for compromising on principles obsolete. A step in the wrong direction is wrong no matter how many people want to take it or how powerful those wanting to go in the wrong direction actually are. Sometimes it is simply necessary to just say NO.

These articles are being posted now for two reasons. First, the people involved with this project feel that it is imperative that Sarah Palin not withdraw from the race and that the very future of the United States as we know it, might well depend on her staying in the race until the last votes have been counted. She has said she will decide before the end of September. It is our hope that she will announce her candidacy, but in any case we hope she will not withdraw from the race until she has had the chance to read the entire series. There are sixteen separate articles. If we publish one per day, the series will not be published in its entirety until well after the end of September. It is our fondest hopes that these articles might provide the fuel and ammunition that Sarah Palin and others could use to create the conditions that could foster a Renaissance in America. And that through the United States living up to expectations as the role model for the world, the American Renaissance would eventually become a global renaissance.

The second reason for publishing these publicly and publishing them now is that our private efforts to place the Renaissance Plan into the hands of the people who can actually create the conditions needed have not yet been successful. It is simply time to leave no stone unturned in trying to advance this project. There may be any number of people who could lead this project to a successful conclusion, but it is our opinion that there may not be anyone who could achieve success as quickly and efficiently as Charles Koch. If you can put the authors of the plan in touch with Sarah Palin or Charles Koch, please contact Vintage Freeper by freepmail without delay.

Thank You.

Ping.

(SNIP) - Paraphrasing Ted Koppel’s comment about the Ten Commandments, the Constitution is not a set of suggestions. The Constitution’s enumerated powers and limitations ensure maximum liberty in a free republic. When the chief enforcer shows such profound contempt for the Constitution, he needs to be reminded that no one is above the law. Not even The One…
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/16/obama-tears-up-the-constitution/

Aside from money/banking reform, some sort of a major political reform is needed, basically a voters' bill of rights of some sort. The progressive disenfranchisement of the American middle class has to be reversed.

The first item of such a bill HAS TO BE runoff elections or instant runoff elections for all public offices. Nobody should ever fear to vote his first choice, at least on a first ballot, and nobody should ever hold any public office with less than 50% of the vote.

There should also be a None-Of-Above choice on all ballots for public office and if that choice ever wins, then the other candidates should be barred for life from holding any public office and the parties sponsoring them should be barred for at least ten years from sponsoring candidates for that particular office. The penalty for running dead wood for public offices should be severe.

Another item on such a voters' bill of rights should be something which would eliminate voting fraud for all time and if that means getting rid of the secret ballot or at least limiting it somehow or other, so be it, we're paying too high a price for it. Or it could mean that when an election is within one percentage point, send both people to congress with half of a vote each. You could expect them to split their vote on ideological issues but vote identically on issues which affect their own district.

There should be a provision that when a president is impeached and removed, his VP goes out the door with him and the office is either vacant until the next election or an emergency election is held to fill the office for the remainder of the current term. Granted removing a president should be difficult but it should not be impossible and if we couldn't remove Slick, we'd not have been able to remove Hitler or Nero either.

What happened in 98/99 was that Trent Lott simply refused to hand the presidency over to Algor with a year to go on Slick's second term, for obvious reasons. The situation should not be possible.

A person should need to be a US citizen for 18 years before voting in a US election. It should not be possible for a political party to rule our land by simply importing large voting blocks for itself.

There should also be some mechanism to prevent utterly unqualified people from holding high offices. Certainly a candidate for president or vice president, or for US Senator or member of the House of Representatives should need to obtain the same basic and simple secret level security clearance which anybody would need to be a guard at the gate of any military base in our land. That isn't asking for much but it would have spared us from the last two democrat presidents.

There are a few other things you'd want but that's the main gist of it. There is also a question as to the extent the people should be voting on issues directly since we now have the technology to allow that while the founding fathers did not. You could get some of these social issues settled once and for all and out of politics, and you could limit the scope for corruption and bribery by letting the people themselves settle at least some kinds of issues.

Nice list. But one of them doesn’t belong. Hint, it’s the one that would allow a handful of state legislative bosses to anoint US Senators. That would create a renaissance for political corruption.

I heartily Agree SF_Redux— I can add only We the people need be reminding Congress of this as well— for too many of them have for too long been living as if the money they can raise can buy any election and the Constitution be damned.When we the sheep being to rebel against the false shepherds perhaps they will move on to easier pickins.

All of these things have to be approved by the very perpetrators of the aforementioned abuses. Think they will?

If we win the White House and both houses of Congress, we have a shot.

Outstanding! I would suggest that this effort join and post these same articles at each of the following sites as well...this needs to be spread to and be a part of the various tea party efforts all over the country:

TEA PARTY PATRIOTS	TEA PARTY NATION
TEA PARTY EXPRESS	REFOUNDERS
THE 912 PROJECT	RESISTNET
FREEDOMWORKS	RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION

Thank you for the suggestion. It is a bit embarrassing to admit, but most of the people who have been involved with this project have been involved in their own lives and families using what spare time they have on efforts connected to this project. They have not been political activists.

Is it possible that there are people who are members of this forum and participants in these other efforts who might be willing to post these articles on the other sites you mention?
It would be greatly appreciated if volunteers might be willing to do this for us and recruitments would be welcomed.

Thanks Jeff.

We would also like to say thank you to any freeper who is willing to use their ping lists to make others aware of this series of articles.

Thank you Freepers for any and all pings.

I Have a question, VF.

"•Phasing out of the Entitlements beginning with making participation in Social Security an individual personal choice."

If Social Security is already insolvent with mandatory participation forced on every legally working American alive today, how does it not merely become less so when huge chunks of the workforce are allowed to "opt out?" Mind you, I'm not arguing for the current system, I'm just trying to imagine how this "fix" can actually be a fix?

And if your answer, or part of it, is, "Make sure that all funds paid into the system are kept safe within the system," how do you propose to do that? Would not that act alone guarantee the solvency of the current arrangement?

Interesting, but not bulletproof. IMHO

A plan that anticipates and makes provisions for human nature would have a better chance of success. Huge piles of billion$ of dollar$ (as in a "Social Security Trust Fund" per se) are not safe when/if under the control of the D.C. election addicts.

The phasing out of the entitlements will be a challenging complex issue that will require Reagan Wing candidates to explain to the electorate a course of action that is as fair as possible with regard to people covered by Social Security. Here is what I would propose:

• Working people who are presently paying into Social Security through their FICA taxes will have the option to opt out of Social Security. The contribution paid by employers will still be collected by the government as a tax and used to pay benefits to present and future beneficiaries. The opting out worker will be able to keep the part that is normally taken out of their personal paycheck as the employee payment and use it for whatever purpose they see fit. It is their money.
• People presently drawing Social Security benefits or those about to draw who opt out will be given zero coupon bonds with staggered maturities based on their life expectancies and the benefits they would be projected to draw. They would be able to sell their bonds to anyone at any time for any reason.
• The government's cash flow drain will be favorably affected by substituting the zero coupon bonds with staggered maturities in place of the annuitized payments that beneficiaries normally draw.
• The options will belong to workers and beneficiaries not the government. Any cash flow shortfalls in Social Security will be made up from general revenues until SS is basically voluntarily abandoned and ceases to exist.
• Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, welfare and every other entitlement is unconstitutional, morally wrong, and economically unfounded. These programs should be abolished over a one to three year phase out.
• There are some common misconceptions with regard to health care. Not having insurance does no equate to being denied health care.
• The majority of health care dispensed/utilized in the United States is not essential to life or the preservation of health; it is dispensed/utilized because somebody wants it and somebody else has been willing to pay for it.
• It is almost pure myth to believe anybody in America has ever been denied essential medical care because of the inability to pay. And the rare examples that might exist, would not predictably be changed regardless of any health care insurance scheme.
• More health care misadventures probably occur from over-utilization than would ever occur from a lack of the ability to pay for needed services.
• Until the income tax is abolished, health insurance and medical expenses should be deductible to anybody who pays them.

Experience gained over time and through the developed wisdom of open discussion in an environment where term limits moot some of the political repercussions of such discussion should hopefully establish a steadily improving environment for dealing with difficult problems in a responsible way rather than purely for political motives.

I would also suggest that we garnish the retirement payments to every living former Senator, Representative and President by 90% and apply those funds to the paying out of benefits to Social Security recipients.

They either actively stole the billions of dollars that should now be sitting in the Social Security Trust Fund, or sat by and did nothing while those monies were misappropriated and used for purposes other than those for which they were intended.

These co-conspiritors have contributed by omission or comission to my money not being there when I will need it, and they should not be allowed to profit from their felony. Since they have deprived us of our retirement security, it is only fair that we deprive them theirs.

It matters not how much or how little this cash influx turns out to be, it is a simple matter of principle. We either have principles and stand upon them, or we have none and we fall. I prefer the former. I believe America would agree that the theives should be allowed to repay us what they stole.

;^\

One of the articles touches on this very subject. But instead of penalizing present and past Congresses by justly taking away benefits they unjustly bestowed on themselves, there could be more to be gained by letting them keep those rewards by giving up some other things to the people that could be vastly more beneficial to the people. As you will see in that future article, their ability to keep their Congressional benefits could be the carrot and stick that gets the people a whole new cart that can carry us into the future.

Here’s a few thoughts off the top of my head.

Give folks the option of simply getting paid back, when they reach retirement age, the money they put in, in one lump sum, no interest and no business portion included.

I would take it...and then invest it myself. This would be far less than they are apt to pay out over someone’s life expectancy these days. but also allow the individual to grow that amount through their own investments.

Establish a certain age where people can opt out just as VF says, have another option where their money can be taken out, but invested wherever they indicate, including the market, with them taking the risk on losses, but the chance on better profits too.

Ensure that it is really an inviolate trust fund that cannot be raided. Subject anyone, including politicians to stiff criminal penalties for any cockeyed legislation, or other gimmickes that do try to raid it.

Human nature is certainly what it is, but most company’s trust funds for retirement are kept solvent...and the ones that are not, if there is any raiding going on end up costing people huge fines and jail time, as they should.

Thanks for the ping VF. I pray you achieve enormous success with your plan(s). For some reason it brings to mind a well known observation from Winston Churchill about Americans, to wit:

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.

I don't know if Americans are a peculiar breed or not but I suspect we're not much different from most other humans that have ever walked this earth. We have a tendency to move along with the herd until lightning strikes. At which time, there's no telling what's liable to happen.

The beginnings of the Tea Party "movement" itself seems to be such an event. From a seemingly innocuous comment by a financial commentator on a sparsely watched program on a thinly watched cable network, lightning struck. Notwithstanding the best efforts of our would be wrangler masters, some of the herd broke ranks and set off on their own in a different direction. More of the herd joined them. Will it turn into a stampede? If it does, it could not only bring us back from the abyss but could possibly bring the rest of the world along with us.

Again, best of luck.

Thanks for the kind words and your enlightened analysis. Pray hard; we need all the help possible.

Today’s article should be available shortly. Please keep the prayers, pings, and your thoughtful analysis coming.

How would go about ending welfare?

Bookmark.

(ping to For God’s Sake, related to 10th pings)

There are 100 US Senators and 435 members of the House of Representatives. The President and members of his cabinet make recommendations and trade-offs with Congressional leaders when making law. It is not possible to predict what the law will become when changes are about to be made.

At best We the people can make recommendations. As the numbers of people holding seats in Congress that were elected through the efforts of this plan increase, the influence on the legislation coming out of Congress will begin to reflect the goals of the people who elected them.

One could argue that some type of means and income testing could be implemented in which the people with the most economic resources lose their eligibilty for welfare first. Could a reasonable case be made for a complete phase out over a five year period, with 1/60th losing their eligibility every month?

People losing their eligibility would not be without resources and assistance; it just would not be governmental assistance. Over a period of time, it would hopefully become the case that the lucky ones are the people who lose the government's welfare as organizations and individuals gain experience and create new ways to help the people losing their eligibilty for the government's welfare. The lucky ones will hopefully discover real resources that can actually help these people to learn to provide their own means of support and regain their freedom and independence.