As a writer, I have also been labled as a “tax rotester’, “right-wing radical”, “militant”, “paranoid conservative” (whatever the heck that is), “dissenter”, and, in so many words, desribed as being ‘out of touch with reality’, ‘stupid’, ignorant, ‘dumbass’, and other terms of non-endearment.

But, I have also been described as ‘hitting the nail right on the head’ (apparently a lot of others who are just as “paranoid”) and thanked for my efforts many times over. The more flowery discriptions won’t be gone into since enemies of what I write wouldn’t believe it anyway.

Since one must remain positive in the attempt to convey their thoughts to others, one must also have the ability to turn negatives into positives. A means of doing so for a writer is to do an indepth analysis of what led others to view his commentary as ‘paranoid’ or whatever description might have been used.

Being that this writer is nearly 55, he can rely, in part, on noticable differences between the present and what has developed during his lifetime concerning government. My question at this time is whether or not my reaction is a reaction to inaccurately perceived events resulting in paranoid type responses. Or, to phrase this question another way, has the federal government exceeded the limits provided in the Constitution by enacting prohibited legislation resulting in removal of liberties or have I developed a delusionatory system resulting in distrust of government and government armed forces?

First, will the Declaration of Independence provide any fuel for deeming my distrust of government and its hidden agendas as “paranoid”? Let’s see.

One immediately notices the purpose of the declaration was to declare the causes which impel one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another. Thus, perhaps it can be used as a guide to determining paranoia.

It is my contention that the following words are the most important words written for liberty and the founding of this nation. I am in awe of the men who placed their lives, families, and, in some cases, fortunes, in jeopardy when confronting the most powerful nation on Earth at the time.

“WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness ...”

In my opinion, this words are the foundation for the founding of this nation. It clearly establishes the God-given rights of the individual as the most important consideration of the writers of the Declaration of Independence; in other words, the basis for the dissolution of political bonds with England.

The Declaration then states:

“That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...”

There can be no mistake that the founding fathers intended on designing a government in which the power to govern remained with the people. In other words, a government’s power must remain within the limits allowed by the governed. Thus, any contract between states establishing a central government would have to delineate the boundaries government was confined to. This is clearly expressed in the following words of the Declaration:

“...that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles ...”

Then, the Declaration states:

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, that to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.”

This is not difficult to understand. It means simply that people will suffer the evils of a given situation until NOT changing the situation becomes unbearable. In other words, in reference to our long-established government, evils will be tolerated simply because of people’s tendency to resist the early indicators for the necessity of change.

Our founders recognized this, one might say, natural tendency in people but also recognized the fact that as evils against rights mounted, people would be driven to change. Indeed, forcing change was their DUTY if they wished to remain a free people. The Declaration stated it thusly:

“But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.”

Then, the framers of the Declaration of Independence listed the abuses and usurpations by the King of Great Britain which had as a “...direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” In order to prove this, the founders submitted "Facts to a candid world", as they phrased it.

Remember the question concerning me is whether or not my analysis of government actions are imaginary and derived only from my suffering from paranoia or are, instead, based on fact.

In analyzing this situation, the need to treat the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches of government as a single entity is necessitated, meaning the US Government must be treated as the ‘individual’ in charge of governing, sort of the King of the United States of America.

Are anti-drug laws constitutional? NO

Are firearm control laws constitutional? NO

Is a direct tax by Congress on the citizens of the 50 States constitutional? NO

Is it constitutional for stops and seizures without a warrant stating exactly the person's name and what is being looked for? NO

Is the IRS following due process of law? NO

Are the courts obeying the Constitution? NO

Are members of legislators obeying and protecting the Constitution? NO

Does our money have any value? NO

Is the Federal Reserve constitutional? NO

Should we have been involved in world skirmishes, such as Desert Storm, Viet Nam, Korea, and so on? Are these actions constitutional? NO

Does the US Government cover-up its screw-ups? YES

Has it taken action against American citizens on American soil? YES

Has it fabricated charges against those it deems 'dissidents'? YES

Has it conducted testing of drugs and warfare chemicals on citizens of the united States of America? YES

Has it sold drugs to finance illegal war and covert operations, such as Iran-Contra? YES

Did the president, vp and CIA know about the above actions? YES

Has the government or its agencies intentianally killed those who get in their way? YES

Does the federal government have agencies and non-agencies (such as the IRS/BATF)operaing illegally in the 50 States? YES

Does the government have control over what is taught in public schools? YES

Does it require schools to teach the truth concerning such important matters such as taxes, the Constitution, the design of a Republic, the jobs of legislators, and so on with the intent of creating well-educated citizens as to government? NO NO NO

Does it control people throught the monetary system, taking from those who work, and giving to those who don't? YES

Does it control transportation and communications? YES

Does it monitor telephone, Internet transmissions, credit cards, and other facts about people it hasn't any right to know? YES

Gosh, Folks, if this isn't enough to prove the threat against liberty by the federal government (and its allies, State governments) is very real, that there is as a "...direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” --then what will it take - a government agent sticking the barrel of his automatic weapon in your family's mouths and pulling the trigger while you watch?