How To
Destroy Your Nation
How the Patriot Movement has been
Self-Defeating
In order
to find a means by which to correct the problems within our
Nation, I had
to spend many, many hours studying what had gone wrong for those
who had
already tried to accomplish the same goals. What I found was
perhaps
more disconcerting than what I expected to find. I expected to
find that
the political failures were due entirely to the media bias against
us – what
I found was that media coverage of poorly managed campaigns would
probably
have done more harm than good. I expected to find that corruption
in the
judicial system was the cause for all of the legal losses we've
suffered
– but what I found was piles of legal filings based upon erroneous
theories,
poorly framed arguments, and philosophy instead of law. I expected
to find
that the socialist agenda taught to our kids in public schools was
responsible
for the total lack of understanding they have about proper
government, but
what I found was that parents simply aren't teaching their
children about
it at home. So I ask you – who is responsible for the
impotence of
the Patriot Movement? We are.
How
can we lay
blame to the Court if we failed to raise the proper arguments, or
follow
the Court's procedures? How can we blame the Court if we raised no
argument
based solidly in law, but tried instead to get a Court of law to
make a ruling
based upon philosophy? How can we claim the Court is in error when
we failed
to properly research the law and frame an argument based upon
it? Far
more importantly, How dare we allow a legal precedent to be
established which
will help defeat all other Patriots who follow after us, simply
because we
failed to properly proceed with our case.
How
can we blame
the liberal media for not giving our candidate fair media coverage
when our
campaigns are disorganized, the candidate in many cases gives
incomplete
or poorly worded answers, fails to clearly address issues of
concern for
local voters, or intentionally establishes themselves as an
inflammatory
radical nut? In such cases, media coverage would do more harm than
good.
How can we blame the media for not covering a candidate who
focuses his campaign
on an issue which is only of interest to a small percentage of the
public,
and is inflammatory to the rest? How can we blame the media
for not
covering a candidate who proposes (legitimate) theories which
would initially
destroy the entire economic structure of the nation, but cannot
propose a
means of implementing it which wouldn't result in widespread
poverty and
the candidate cannot answer complex economic questions? So I ask
again… who
is to blame for not getting our candidates into the public eye? We
are.
How
can we blame
the schools for filling the minds of our children with socialist
agendas
when we fail to teach them the truth at home? How can we blame the
state
for not doing our job the way we want it done? How dare we claim
on the one
hand that the failure of the family is the fault of the state, and
on the
other hand not take the time to teach our children how things
should be?
How dare we as parents blame our failure on the influence of the
state and
local officials we helped get elected by either not getting
involved at all
or by sponsoring and supporting candidates who simply had no
chance of getting
elected either due to their own faults, or the poor management of
their campaigns?
And I ask again, who is at fault for the lack of understanding in
our children?
We are.
With
all that
said, let me explain what needs done now. There is no benefit in
pointing
out the mistakes of well intended Patriots unless it is
accompanied by instructions
for avoiding those same mistakes. The failures are our own, now
let's fix
them.
Using the
Judicial System
The losses we've
suffered in the courts can largely be attributed to a few basic
causes, although
they manifest themselves in very different ways in different
cases. It is
important to note a few basic facts though, which seriously affect
every
single case.
1) The judicial system is composed of
courts of law,
not theory and not morality. If the court begins to recognize
theories, philosophies,
or codes of morality, then the court has lost all integrity as to
issues
of law. If the court recognizes any philosophy or code of
morality, then
it must also recognize opposing philosophies or codes of morality.
It would
soon become impossible to distinguish what the law is, and is not
– and the
court would have to adopt as its own a philosophy or code of
morality.
This would effectively cause the Court to be a legislative body,
and would
be totally detrimental to the cause of Constitutional government.
Many theories,
philosophies, and moral codes are indicated within laws, but only
the laws
– not the supported theories, are useable in a court of law.
2) The courts have established rules by
which they
operate. Failing to abide by those rules can defeat any case at
any time…
simply put, play by the rules, or you lose no matter how good your
argument
is. (learning the rules and forcing opposing counsel to follow
them can be
rather effective as well.)
3) The judicial process is slow… if you're
not willing
to stay the course, don't start the race. There is nothing
accomplished if
you aren't willing to devote years to the fight.
4) If you aren't willing to take the time
and spend
the effort to do the job correctly, don't cause problems for those
who are.
Improperly filed or poorly framed cases do far more harm than
good, and simply
shouldn't be filed in the first place. They do far more harm than
good.
If all you seek to do is make a statement, I'd suggest using
the local
newspaper. If you want to accomplish anything in the court system
you'll
have to follow the Rules of Procedure perfectly, and base your
arguments
upon the only two sources of authority recognized by the court:
law and case
law (prior rulings of the courts). Arguments based upon a
ruling which
has been overturned since it was originally made will almost
always fail,
so do your homework before using it. Be sure to cite the laws on
which you
base every argument, any case law which supports your position,
and what
law gives the court in which you are filing your complaint
jurisdiction in
the case. You must also cite what harm you have suffered and from
whom when
you file a complaint. Trying to "pile it on" by creating charges
not based
in applicable law will do far more harm than good – don't bother.
Be specific
with the charges, and cite the proper laws, or you'll be shooting
yourself
in the foot.
The
Political Process
"Protest candidates"
are a joke – a bad joke. Candidates who make inflammatory
statements or radical
comments in order to get publicity for their cause harm both
themselves and
any other candidate running for office under the same party.
Candidates for
office who want to propose economic changes need to be qualified
to discuss
the economy intelligently and in depth. Candidates must be
prepared to answer
clearly the tough questions – they will be asked, and any slip
when answering
will be fatal to the candidacy. Candidates must know how to apply
Constitutional
principles to the issues that other candidates are discussing, or
(if enough
publicity is available to the candidate) to force other candidates
to talk
about the issues that are important to the citizens in the area.
No one will
ever get elected talking about having a strong national defense in
a town
where thousands of people have recently become unemployed and
their opponent
is talking about tax rebates, economic growth, and more welfare
benefits.
If that same candidate focused on eliminating government waste,
foreign aid
programs, and protecting the US economy from foreign competition…
he'd have
a good chance. The campaign has to match the local issues, and the
candidate
has to be able to speak intelligently on the issues, and keep the
discussion
focused on the issues important to the local voters.
Years
of experience
have taught career politicians what the "weak areas" of each
political party
are. These are the areas where the political platform of a
political party
makes it a target for public scrutiny. Any candidate can expect to
face tough
questions on these areas intended to redirect the focus of his
campaign.
Any candidate for the Constitution Party can expect to be labeled
as being
the "religious right" and seeking to install his religious
convictions as
law. Any conviction he actually states will be labeled as
doctrines of hate…
and the credibility of the candidate and the fate of the candidacy
will depend
on his response. If the response is based in law and stated in a
non-inflammatory
way, the candidate will fare well, if the answer is based upon his
own personal
beliefs, he should save his time and money, because his candidacy
is effectively
over. Candidates for the Libertarian party are similarly situated
with their
position on the legalization of drugs. Any candidate, whose
response is anything
other than a quote of law risks being accused of being a user
himself, and
his credibility and his candidacy are matters of history. Every
minor party
has its own "radical" issues, and if attention is focused upon
them, they'll
never get elected.
Why bother?
Let's
face it;
there isn't much point in debating issues which don't have any
bearing on
the office being sought. Don't get caught in the trap; don't speak
about
issues not related to the campaign.
If
the issues
that are important to you are covered under federal law, why run
for a local
office? If the issues that are important to you are only covered
in local
law, why run for state or federal office? If the office for which
you are
running is essentially an arm of higher government (i.e., local
school board
where state offices mandate compliance, etc.) why bother… seek the
higher
office, so that you have a chance of accomplishing something.
(Local school
boards in some states still have reasonable amounts of authority,
and in
those areas, the office should be sought.)
The Next
Generation
If
you want
to raise socialists dedicated to the creation of a one world
government and
a police state, then just send your children off to school and
assume they
are being taught well. If you want to raise Patriots, then you'd
better figure
on raising them yourself instead of letting the state do it for
you. Explain
to your children what is wrong with our current government, and
how it is
supposed to be. You'll be amazed how interested they are, and how
much they'll
understand. If we fail at this, anything else we accomplish will
be a total
waste of time.
Robert Marlett,
CEO
Freedom's Cry Foundation