Skip to comments.State senate candidate drops out, says she’ll be part of alternate government
Posted on 07/15/2012 11:38:15 PM PDT by 11th_VA
UPDATE: Iowa Republicans plan to choose another candidate to run in Senate District 34 against Democrat Liz Mathis, after Randi Shannon bailed on the race to pursue leadership in an alternate form of government.
Shannon, who describes herself as an entrepreneur and homeschooling mom, released a four-page message Friday saying she is now the senator of the Republic of the United States of America and the Republic for Iowa.
The group believes that Americas original form of government, a collection of republics, was usurped in 1871 by a corporation called the United States Corporation, according to the groups website.
Now, knowing this, and with the best interests of the people of Iowa District 34 uppermost in my heart and out of respect for my own conscience, I am here to announce that I am ending my campaign as of July 4, Shannon wrote in her statement. My level of service to the good people of Iowa who has been so supportive of me and my campaign will be greatly increased.
Shannon told The Gazette she knows some people may question her decision.
If people think its crazy to want to have a constitutional government back in place, then so be it, she said.
Shannon, 39, considered joining the Republic of the United States of America this spring after talking with Iowans disgusted by the lack of action in state and federal government.
Every year we have these elections and every year more people get discouraged, Shannon said. Nothing ever really seems to change.
She met with other leaders in the Republic of the United States of America and was appointed senator by the groups Iowa delegation, which includes four house members, treasurer, judge and governor.
The Iowa groups speaker of the house, George Rowdy Templer, of Davenport, said the group believes citizens have been burdened by the cost of the current government. The Republic of the United States of America would abolish federal taxes and require citizens to approve all state and local taxes.
There are a lot of ways the people are being preyed upon by the current government, Templer said. In the near term, our main efforts are to help people be aware there is a choice.
Linn County Republicans will hold a nominating convention in the next few weeks to select Shannons replacement, said Don McDowell, spokesman for the office of the Iowa Senate Republican Leader.
Randi made her decision. Were moving forward, he said. Were quite confident the Linn County Republicans will find a suitable candidate to go toe-to-toe with Sen. Mathis.
McDowell doesnt think Shannons shift to a more libertarian viewpoint reflects the direction of the Republican Party as a whole. Absolutely not. This is a personal decision she made, he said.
Shannon had not yet filed her withdrawal with the Iowa Secretary of States office as of Friday afternoon. The deadline for withdrawing from the election is Aug. 9. To select a new candidate, Linn County Republicans must hold a nominating convention and have their candidate file nomination papers by Aug. 17.
District 34 includes Marion, Hiawatha, Robins and Linn County east of Cedar Rapids.
kinda catchy, may actually grow legs providing it starts with all the right moves.
And of course a dynamic leadership.
You hope that conservatives quit running for real offices and start playing Model UN instead?
STILL on the wrong track, not realizing that ACTION by state or federal government is the CAUSE, not solution, to most of the problems that plague us.
It maybe the only way to stop this unholy colossus in DC is by running a counter US government based on the original
constitution and at least the first 14 or so of its first Amendments. A new American revolution with a working constitutional model in place to supercede the current structure as more people catch on...by pursuasion I would hope, or as I fear most, by blood and fire!
I’m not fully up to speed on this woman, so I’ll simply state this.
From time to time, I have pondered if it wouldn’t be a good idea to start a form of government in exile.
It would be a powerless entity, but it could serve to highlight the absurdity that our government has become.
Other nations whose governments have gone rogue, have formed governments in exile. Those figurehead governments make statements about policy, and actually serve to highlight just what it is, that the formal government is doing that is outside the law, or in conflict with the constitution.
Governments in exile sometimes step up when the formal government fails.
Could states make arrangements to hold elections that would cause all elected officials nationwide to be replaced with a new team? I doubt it directly.
It still might be a tactic that could result in the same thing taking place, if the government in exiles political figures were to declare nationwide for office in three elections in a row.
If you can’t get your elected officials to adhere to the U. S. Constitution, simply start a government in exile, one that makes policy statements that are sound, and totally destroys the credibility of the officials who have gone rogue. When the sitting crooks are so discredited that they can no longer maintain their elected seats, enter the government players in exile.
I prefer we overtake the GOP machinery.
I need to think about this for a bit, but I am starting to get my mind around the concept. I am not going to go so far, now, as saying it’s a good idea, but it very well may be.
My frustration with the primary process, which unfailingly delivers the establishment candidate to the nomination (since Reagan, anyhow), and has delivered unto a disgusted core of Conservatives the one candidate we most certainly did not want, leads me to believe we may eventually have to give up trying through the current system.
That system’s barriers against intrusion are uniform across the political structure and they have no intention of changing it. Democrats sure aren’t going to help Conservatives get in. They like RINOS. Or are at least willing to use them, and keep them paid off.
They who hold power will not voluntarily relinquish it. And as the Romney candidacy shows clearly, they are pretty sure they can get away with it.
Oh, I agree with you; but still maintain the primary cause of our problems is “action” by state & federal government, that these people are lamenting the lack of. Different issue.
In most cases, regardless of administration, “gridlock” is our friend.
She can win my election anytime!
How do you boycott the government?
Do you no longer pay any taxes from sales tax to property tax to income tax?
Do you no longer file for 501c(3) exemptions for your church?
Do you not register your vehicles? Or your children for SS?
Do you refuse to carry auto insurance, home insurance, health insurance?
Do you no longer apply for permits to build or remodel?
Do you refuse to apply for a license in your profession?
Do you refuse to recognize any Municipal, County, State or
Federal law enforcement?
Do you refuse to deal with FRNs?
For decades, a potion of Americans stated that politics and governments were subservient to their faith and anathema to their personal individual sovereignty. There is no escape and most of these people ended up in court. You can lose everything, including your children. Even very wealthy people who attempted to live as Free Sovereign Americans ended up besieged by various branches of government.
The Feds have co-opted the 10th Amendment. They assert an overwhelming interest and it is upheld in all the courts.
It simply isn’t an option for the individual. I’m not even sure if the States can assert themselves any longer. The Feds can make it very expensive and eventually, the citizens will cave and elect a Federally-compliant State administration.
Many States are now simply Federal Administrative Districts, not separate sovereign entities.
The District of Columbia Act of 1871What did it do?
Initial review of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 seems like it only sets up a local government (like Chicago or Seattle); how do you get that they formed a private corporation? If you take the Act out of its historical context and, from the present looking to the past, imagine who the parties involved are, we might agree. However, by doing that you will never understand what happened; therefore, to best understand what really happened we follow our:
Standard for Review
Rule 1: To understand any relationship you must:First understand who the parties are; Always know yourself first Discover the true nature of all other parties second
Then you must understand the environmental nature of the relationship; and,
Only then do the actual terms of the relationship begin to have meaning and bearing on the relationship.
Rule 2: To have any hope of understanding any particular situation in any relationship you must have first applied Rule 1, only then do the details of the situation in question have any meaning; therefore, review such details in accord with Rule 1 as well.
Thus, to understand the parties involved in the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, we must first understand who the parties are involved in the relationship described by the Act. We are not here going to delve into the Act in its entirety, suffice it to say, looking over the situation we find the Act is one made by the original jurisdiction Congress, set by the Constitution for the United States of America. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 describes its venue as: “all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia”. The District of Columbia was originally provided for in the Constitution for the United States of America (Sept. 17, 1787) at Article 1 Section 8, specifically in the last two clauses. Then, on July 16, 1790, in accord with the provisions of those clauses, the Territory was formed in the District of Columbia Act, wherein the “ten mile square” territory was permanently created and made the permanent location of the country’s government, that is to say, the “territory” includes the actual government. Under the Act Congress also made the President the civic leader of the local government in all matters in said Territory. Then on February 27, 1801, under the second District of Columbia Act, two counties were formed and their respective officers and district judges were appointed. Further, the established town governments of Alexandria, Georgetown and Washington were recognized as constituted and placed under the laws of the District, its judges, etc. The popular names for this “Charter Act” are the, “District of Columbia Organization Act” and the “District of Columbia Act “, which Act the Supreme Court has recognized was the incorporation of the “municipality” known as the “District of Columbia”. Then on March 3, 1801 a Supplementary Act to that last Act, noted here, added the authority that the Marshals appointed by the respective District Court Judges collectively form a County Commission with the authority to appoint all officers as may be needed in similarity to the respective State officials in the states whence the counties Washington and Alexandria came, those being Maryland and Virginia, respectively.
According to the United States Supreme Court those charter acts (first acts) were the official incorporation of the formal municipal government of the District of Columbia as chartered by Congress in accord with the Constitution’s provision. Again, the Supreme Court called that body of government “a corporation”, with the right to sue and be sued. Since 1801 The District of Columbia has been consistently recognized as a “municipal corporation” with its own government.
That sets the basics for the first rule of our Standard for Review, know the parties. What we have presented is sufficient to show the basics of who the parties are as they related to resolving the answer to the question above. We admonish everyone to prove the facts for themselves by their own research.
The second rule from our Standard for Review is: “Then you must understand the environmental nature of the relationship.” With that in mind let’s consider the events of the time: the Civil War had recently ended and the country was still under Lincoln’s Conscription Act (Martial Law). Congress had at least three problems they could see no way to directly cure by following the laws of the land: they were out of funds, they had promised 40 acres of land to each slave that left the South to fight for the North and they had to reintegrate the south into the Union, which they could not do without controlling the appointment of the Southern States Congressional members. There were other problems but these three stand out from the rest. That is enough about the environment for the purposes of this review, however the more you study the historical events of this time the more obvious the relationships will become and the more proof you will amass to prove the facts of what actually happened. In the interest of time and space in this response we will move on.
The last step of the Standard for Review’s discovery process requires a review of the actual terms of the relationship. Thus, we review the first paragraph of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, which follows:
Congress wrote:That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation
Knowing the government of the District of Columbia was already “created into a government” and so formed into a municipal incorporation in 1801 under the District of Columbia Acts, we wonder, even with Congress’ constitutional authority to pass any law within the ten mile square of the District, how do you create, or incorporate, for the first time a municipal government that has already been in existence as a municipal corporation for over 60 years? The obvious answer is, “It’s impossible!” There is no way to pass an “Organic Act” when the Charter Act is already in place, because the two words (organic and charter) have the same meaningThe First Act. Even Congress cannot change history; though historians can make it appear to change by rewriting it for those unwilling to study the past from the records. The records speak for themselves only if we study them.
When you consider the historical facts, the only meaning left for the terms given in the opening paragraph of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 (and that which follows) is, the “municipal corporation” that was created is a private corporation owned by the existent municipality. And the only government created in that Act was the same government any private corporation has within the operation of its own corporate construct. Thus, we call it Corp. U.S. We also note Congress reserved the right, granted them in the Constitution, to complete dictatorial authority over their Corp. U.S. construct, without regard for its internal operations or officers. Thus, Congress can use it within the ten mile square as they see fit to both govern the municipality as if it were the municipal government and to use it to do things the Constitution did not grant them the privilege of doing.
Here is a video version for those who don’t like to read:
Has she been hanging around the APaulists? Maybe she got bitten by a moonbat.
Certain progressive interests for a century have used a process of co-option to insinuate themselves into the fabric of American life to unravel it from within. They worked for years to come along side the Constitutional processes and the religious life of the nation, exploiting weaknesses, snearing at the warnings of the older wiser men who saw what was coming, and exploiting our divisions.
The Constitution provides the template by which restoration minded Patriot groups can begin a co-opting reverse process...but it will take patience with hearts turned back to our soveriegn Lord from whom of our lives, treasure, and our sacred honor”.(but first we must try to rediscover what the term “sacred honor means”). It may mean the second American Revolution!
Indeed, a re-education process must recommence to begin to teach our generation just from whence our freedoms came and how we as a free people can justify our individual rights, responsibilities and liberties! We must teach our fellow ignorant children and American brethren how to assert those rights, armed if necessary, in the face of those Fabian progressive Demons who “pooh pooh” notions of Christian faith, piety, and the self regulating actions of a Christianized population!
Above all we must understand that “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty” and that there could be no liberty at all without the grace of the living God!
Oops this passage should read:
“The Constitution provides the template by which restoration minded Patriot groups can begin a co-opting reverse process...but it will take patience with hearts turned back to our sovereign Lord from whom of our lberties flow. For all of us, it will mean pledging our “lives, treasure, and our sacred honor.(but first we must try to rediscover what the term sacred honor means). It may mean the second American Revolution!”
>I hope this catches on ...
Unlike the Grange or the Bull Moose parties, this one has no significance at all.
Even the Communist party works within the framework of this Country
Whatever her views are Randi is a nice lady and nice to look at. At least she’s not a nasty harpy.