We Need A Revolution, Not A Movement

by Chuck Baldwin

August 27, 2010

(Editor’s Note: Everywhere you see the word “Revolution,” replace
it with “Secession.” The article will make more sense.)

The elections of 2008 (and the early elections of 2010) produced two
significant phenomena: the “Ron Paul Revolution,” and the “Tea Party
Movement.” And, mark it down: both of them will have profound effects
upon the upcoming November elections–and upon the 2012 elections as well. Call them what you want, however, America doesn’t need another movement; it needs a genuine revolution.

The Tea Party movement, while still a force with which to be
contended, has already been diluted and compromised. The primary
elections plainly reveal the reality of this fact. The high spots so
far are the defeats of Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Bob Bennett
in Utah. The low spots so far are the reelection of John McCain in
Arizona and the election of Dan Coats in Indiana.

John McCain’s election, in particular, demonstrates how many
conservatives and “revolutionaries” still don’t get it. If any State
in the union should have an up-close-and-personal look at what we are up against, it would be the people of Arizona. After all, they are on
the front lines in the fight of one of the most important battles
currently being waged in our country: illegal immigration. And John
McCain is one of the worst offenders in terms of facilitating and
encouraging this illegal invasion. Yet the people of Arizona reelected
McCain to the US Senate. (It would interesting to know how many
illegal aliens voted for McCain, would it not?)

Then again, John McCain received the enthusiastic endorsement of
former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin. This endorsement obviously
brought McCain thousands of Tea Party votes that otherwise would have gone to his principal opponent, J.D. Hayworth. McCain is not the only Big-Government globalist neocon to receive Palin’s endorsement. Many of Palin’s endorsees are neocons; which leads to one of the biggest problems with any so-called conservative movement: allowing
celebrity-type “conservatives” to become the de facto leaders and
spokesmen for what should be a true grassroots, people-generated
rebellion. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are the two biggest culprits in
this regard.

Mark my words: Palin and Beck may see themselves as part of a
conservative “movement,” but they want nothing to do with an
old-fashioned, honest-to-God, Patrick Henry-style revolution. In fact,
they are doing everything in their power to keep such a revolution
from taking place.

This does not mean that Palin and Beck do not contribute some good
things to freedom’s fight. They do. The problem is, for every good
thing they contribute they counterbalance it by supporting
establishment principals, such as John McCain and Newt Gingrich, and
attacking non-establishment players and ideas, which serves only to
keep the Big-Government power structure firmly ensconced in
Washington, D.C.

Get real, folks, and start thinking for yourselves. Ask yourself why
Fox News never (or hardly ever) invites non-establishment patriots to
appear on their network. Why do you not see former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts on Fox News? Why do you not see former Georgia congressman and Presidential candidate Bob Barr on Fox News? Why do you not see former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura on Fox News? Why do you not see former Director of the US Office of Economic Opportunity and Presidential candidate Howard Phillips on Fox News? Why do you not see Presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin on Fox News? The list is endless.

Fox News is not “fair and balanced.” It is as controlled and
manipulated as any other media news network. The only thing it
balances is the other networks’ infatuation with the Democrat Party,
by promoting Republican candidates and ideas. What it does not do is
educate and inform the American people with the truth as to what both major parties are doing to destroy our country. But remember, Fox News is owned by Keith Rupert Murdoch, the same man who helped finance Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the US Senate, and who is as much of a globalist as anyone in Washington, D.C., or New York City.

As an aside, and speaking of Hillary Rodham, I predict that she will
replace Vice President Joe Biden BEFORE the 2012 elections. I’ve said
that in private for many weeks, and now say it in this column–remember, you heard it here. The Clinton-Bush Crime Syndicate
(CBCS) needs Hillary in the White House badly, and Obama has readily
accepted a subservient role in the criminal affairs of CBCS (for very
profitable reasons, no doubt). And with the CBCS bosses pretty much
running things at the White House (they don’t worry about domestic or
social issues, providing that these do not interfere with their
international criminal activities), is it any wonder that Obama has
already taken more vacations than most Presidents take during an
entire term?

And it is the influence of globalists and neocons upon national and
international politics that the likes of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck
simply do not get–or do not want to get. And because many Tea
Partiers are so enamored with these two (and allow them to do much of their thinking for them), they remain clueless as well.

Ladies and gentlemen, America is in the throes of socialist and
Marxist political upheaval. The curtain could fall at any time. The
American people need to wake up to this truism: a “conservative”
movement–even a conservative Tea Party movement–will not save us.The only thing that will save us is an old-fashioned State revolution.

Arizona had the opportunity to become a modern-day version of 1775
Massachusetts. But Arizona has probably forfeited that leadership role
by 1) reelecting John McCain, and 2) being willing to allow federal
courts to dictate law to a sovereign State. Instead of taking its case
to the federal courts, Arizona should simply tell the federal
government that it will enforce its own State laws (including the
newly enacted anti-illegal immigration law) regardless of what any
federal court says or doesn’t say. At some point, that is exactly what
some State (or group of states) in this union is going to have to do,
or liberty will be forever lost.

As long as freedom lovers are content to remain satisfied with the
status quo by allowing party politics and media celebrities to
dominate their efforts, there will be no stopping this socialist
avalanche that is crashing down upon us. The Tea Party movement of
2010 (if left free of Big-Government neocons) could certainly
translate into positive developments this November; that is for sure.
A revival of the “Ron Paul Revolution” in 2012 could also make a
significant contribution, but it is going to take a State revolution
to seal the deal. I, for one, am ready.

Copyright 2010 Chuck Baldwin

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have been married for 37 years and have 3 children and 7 grandchildren.

4 Responses to We Need A Revolution, Not A Movement

  1. […] We Need A Revolution, Not A Movement « DumpDC […]

  2. Chuck Baldwin and his extended family are moving to Montana, who will be next?

    http://libertydefenseleague.com/2010/09/01/the-hardest-decision-of-my-life/

    Starving The Monkeys and Ending The Looterfest,
    John and Dagny Galt
    Atlas Shrugged, Owners Manual For The Universe!(tm)

    .

  3. Arizona has a right–and a moral imperative–to protect its borders, and the proper answer to a “successful” suit in the Feds’ own courts is to ignore the rigged verdict and enforce Arizona law. Wry laughter: what would DC do? Invade Arizona? Impose martial law? In the cause of protecting non-existent “rights” of foreign lawbreakers? I suppose that’s one way to get additional troop presence along the borders, and it would certainly reveal the motives and methods of big government beyond question.

    One wonders…what if Governor Orville Faubus had put the matter to the test when troops marched in over segregation? What if he had made the obvious case that no issue justifies armed aggression against a state?

    Someone wrote an article recently on “Never again,” published on Townhall, as I recall. The author demonstrated that yet again what Statists mean by terms are seldom what the rest of us do. “Never again” is Liberal speak for “Never again will states defy DC if we have to bomb them back to the days of Reparations.” Sorry; they call that “Reconstruction,” with mental images of an early Marshall Plan, replacing burned equipment and buildings and slaughtered livestock.

    No…”Reconstruction” meant exactly what Obama meant by “America is the greatest country in the world. I intend to change that.” The plan was to tear the South down so far that it could never compete against or defy the North again. It was so successful that the South, the wealthy portion of the nation prior to 1860, has never recovered.

    We’re back to “States’ Rights!” again. I keep tellin’ y’all that we’re still fighting over the same issues: taxes, tariffs, big government vs. small, and local control of local problems. This hasn’t got a thing to do with “racism;” it is about protecting our borders and our citizens and punishing or deporting lawbreakers, depending upon whether or not they are legal residents of Arizona.

    Regards,

    Linda Brady Traynham

  4. C. Session says:

    News Flash!

    Just in case readers and visitors to DumpDc.com have not yet heard, something may be brewing up in Montana!

    Pastor Chuck Baldwin just announced that he has resigned as Pastor of the Florida church that he founded many years ago, and will soon move to Montana with his entire family.

    He stated in the article that he may run for state-wide office, which probably means that he will run for governor.

    Pastor Chuck is clearly no fan of Washington D.C. so perhaps, if he were to win the governothsip there, he would oversee the secession of Montana from the United States of America!

    Who knows?

    In my book, though, Pastor Chuck’s move to Montana may portend the arrival of Montana as a major player in the secession movement.

    Pastor Baldwin’s son – Timothy Baldwin – is already a major secession advocate through his website – libertydefenseleague.com, and his new book – Freedom for a Change.

    I wish Pastor Chuck and his family all the best as they move from sunny Florida to frigid Montana, but maybe, just maybe the secession movement has found a new leader in Pastor Chuck.

    I will be watching closely.

    Who will be the first?

    It just could be Montana!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: