Monday, May 31, 2010

Interview with Marie Stroughter, Co-Founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS)

What to do you do when you are NOT among the 96% of blacks who voted for Obama? Ask Marie, rising conservative talk-radio star –– BlogTalkRadio!

Marie Stroughter is co-founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS), which started just after the 2008 presidential election of Barack Obama –– a place for black conservatives to "vent, "share," and "build consensus." Later AACONS added BlogTalkRadio to their repertoire with host Marie Stroughter, opening the show in a sleek, cool and confident tone, "...African-American conservatives; the soul of the conservative movement."

In less than a year, Marie is quickly becoming a conservative talk-radio star. With a line-up consisting of high-profile guests like Steve Forbes, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Malkin, Andrew Breitbart, Lloyd Marcus of the Tea Party Express [photo above: Stroughter and Marcus], Peter Schiff, Chuck DeVore, John Dennis, Star Parker, and many more, you can see why the Los Angeles Times recently took notice of AACONS, with the headline, "Aspiring Rush Limbaughs take to Web radio."

AACON's Internet show, which airs live every Tuesday at 7:00 (PDT) –– occasionally more, has been featured on BlogTalkRadio numerous times including Blog Talk's blog. Last week, Marie had an entertaining interview with Michael Graham, talk show host and author of his latest bestseller, That's No Angry Mob, That's My Mom: Team Obama's Assault on Tea-Party, Talk-Radio Americans, and snagged an interview with former Ambassador John Bolton as well as returning guest, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

I learned about AACONS' "web talk-radio show" back in early March when I was snooping around BlogTalkRadio and happened to listen in on their interview with Steve Forbes. Later, Jamison Braly, Blogcritics writer, who also hosts a BlogTalkRadio show along with Braden Pace –– Stubborn Facts Radio from the Conservamedia Network –– introduced me to Marie.

Listen to internet radio with AACONS on Blog Talk Radio


[AACONS interview with Steve Forbes, March 9, 2010]

Over the past couple of months, I've followed Marie via AACONS' radio show as well as the usual social networking culprits, Facebook and Twitter. In fact, Marie calls me one of AACONS's "biggest fans," and she's right; I admire her mission and the passion she exhibits behind it.

Last week, I had the privilege of interviewing the "interviewee," for Blogcrtics Magazine, realizing that Marie and I have more in common than Conservatism: our Christian faith, raising children, and our pet Calico cats. Marie, along with my teenager daughter, helped navigate me through my first time using Skype and we chatted for a while, discussing a variety of topics including biblical, but mostly political, our president, and the inside story on how AACONS was born and their successful "web talk-radio" show.

Marie, have you always been political?

I can't say that I was apolitical, but I would say that I had been apathetic for a long time, and just voted on measures and never voted for people. I was really disillusioned because I would see candidates that supported something that I believed in, but then they espoused another position that I equally didn't. It was really hard for me to reconcile that.

The two things that politicized me –– "the lightening rods" –– were President Obama's election and watching my mother dying in a county hospital. If you want to know what free-health care is about, just die in "free" health care! But that is another topic entirely, however, at the height of the ObamaCare debate, I addressed it quite passionately in a podcast, with a very personal account about my experience with socialized medicine and why I am against it.

During the campaign I got tons of e-mails from Sebastian's family (my husband) saying, "We have to support Obama." I sent them back this wonderful piece that I found online written by an African-American man named Huntley Brown –– a Christian concert pianist I believe –– "Why I cannot support Barack Obama." He said, "I do not process my life through my blackness, I process my life through my Christianity."

I think most in the African-American community process our politics through our "blackness." Because, economically, we tend to be pretty disenfranchised. And there are so many issues that our community faces –– as all communities do –– so, I think that we tend to process our political views based on what is going on for us culturally. We shouldn't do that. I remember growing up, I had a youth minister that used to say, "You cannot be a thermometer; a thermometer reacts to external situations. You have to be a thermostat; a thermostat sets the temperature, and it does not deviate." Part of the problem is that we as Christians –– as the bible puts it, "My people perish for lack of knowledge." And some are what I call, "cafeteria Christians," while others tend to do "Situation Ethics" rather than allow the Word to be their thermostat.

Did I ever think about voting for Barack Obama? Never once did it enter my mind. Never once did I think,"Oh should I?" Never!

Have you always been a Conservative?

Interestingly, I grew up in a very solidly "blue" household. I mean, it was a sin to like the Dodgers [laugh] –– sorry no offense –– and it was equally a sin to vote for anything other than the Democratic ticket.

However, even in high school, when I was president of our debate team, I gave a speech on "life" and I talked about abortion and its gory practice, in detail. I've always been pro-life and the "sanctity of life" is still a big issue for me today. As I became a Christian, lived life, and starting raising and teaching my children, it solidified what I had always felt about a lot of things.

Let's fast forward. Since you are co-founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS), I was wondering if you would tell me how it all got started? [The ACCONS website, talk-radio show, blog, Amazon bookstore, and the Cafe Press Store]

What really kicked it off for me was having this particular president [Obama]. My family tends to deconstruct the day around the dinner table. My husband and I would talk about a lot of things and my kids were sitting there. I thought, "It's not enough for me to just kvetch about what I like and dislike about this administration. I've got to do more. As long as I have the right to free speech, I need to exercise it and teach my kids to do the same –– to have respect for the office, yet, they can dissent through the laws that are given to us.

So, do you oppose Obama because you think he is too far "left"?

Absolutely! Not only is Obama pro-choice, but partial birth abortion? That is just absolutely barbaric!

[Conversation goes on for a while, but we move on] Remember when I called into your show a couple of weeks ago and I wanted to know how you get so many high-profile guests. As one of your "biggest fans," can you divulge your secret now?

What happened was, as I mentioned, right before the election I got all these e-mails saying, "We need to support this man." Then right after the election, well meaning people would come up to me and say, "We're so happy for YOU" and "YOUR president." And it was like, "Uhhhh . . . okay he doesn't really speak for me." Yeah, of course I appreciate the historicity of the moment. Sure I understand...the guy is our first president of African decent. He is equally as white as he is black, which nobody really talks about. As someone who is multiracial myself, I am sensitive to that particular issue. But, be that as it may, he presents as black and that is how people perceive him. And of course, I am happy for our country; that we have gotten to that point. Am I happy for him? Am I happy that he is the one that broke that barrier? NO! Absolutely, a thousand times, no!

I had been following "DarkKnight3565" on Twitter and I was watching all the things he tweeted. Then I noticed his avatar and I thought, "This is a black guy saying this!" So, I wrote asked him, "Are you tired of people coming up to you, congratulating you on your president." And he expressed some of the similar feelings that I had.

As we talked more, I thought, "I bet there are other people feeling this way," and of course hearing the whole "Tea Party is racists" thing, –– blah, blah, blah. Then I suggested maybe we should throw up a little website where we could talk about some of these things behind closed doors –– not to exclude anybody, but it's just that there are issues specific to the African-American community that may feel a little different to some then they do to the mainstream. Like gun violence and race issues; that we are supposed to be Democrats, that we betrayed our race; that we are "Uncle Toms," and we're "sell-outs." Let's talk about that behind closed doors and then come out and present a unified front on a variety positions. Maybe we can develop some sort of a platform; knowing that there would be a breath of diversity and opinion.

So, were you building a platform to have your voice –– the black conservative community –– be heard?

I think it was really just a place to talk about stuff, vent, and process what was going on because this was a momentous occasion in history and yet we weren't processing it the way that most of our community was –– with this kind of joyous enthusiasm.

Didn't Obama get 95 percent of the black vote?

I think it was around 96 percent. It was huge.

So you are part of the 4 percent that didn't vote for Obama?

Yes. Can you imagine what that was like? I forwarded Huntley's article to my family and they responded, "Oh, you [sic] drinking that Bush kool-aid." I felt like I needed a place to lick my wounds because I was getting it from both sides. I was getting it from the black community because, "I'm the sellout." And people, who were not of the same ethnicity, were celebrating how we're "post racial" and "racism is dead." And I'm sitting there thinking, "I don't fall in either camp; I am totally disenfranchised." As I began to get more involved on Twitter and talk to more people, I found that I wasn't alone. So, we thought that we've got to have a place where we can talk about some of this stuff because we don't fit into any peg.

Right after Sebastian, "DarkKnight," and I started the AACONS website, one of the people that I follow on Twitter mentioned that a friend of his was running for office here in California –– Craig DeLuz, a young conservative black guy, who was doing a lot of great things. He's working with youth and the African-American community, who tend to be blinded in their allegiance to the Democratic Party that has done nothing for them. I wanted to interview him and know how to he was able to translate our conservative values into something that people can internalize –– to make them think and realize that our "core spiritual values" are closer to the conservative end of the spectrum than they are to the liberal [Democratic] end. When you take the word Republican out — the perception that it is all white, old men, and blah, blah, blah –– and you talk about traditional family values and the sanctity of life –– it goes beyond that stereotype.

So, I spoke to Craig DeLuz on the phone for about an hour and it was amazing! When I asked him if he would do an interview, he said, "My twin brother is a Democrat and we have a radio show on BlogTalkRadio (The DeLuz Brothers) –– have you heard of it?" Since I hadn't, he gave me the information and we did our interview on BlogTalkRadio –– our first, which aired on April 16, 2009. Craig Deluz has been our show several times and he started a new show that debuted today, Conversations with Craig.

Well, since your first interview; your show has become a hit and quite popular, attracting high-profile guests like Steve Forbes, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, many politicians and political candidates, authors, and an array of interesting guests. How the heck did that happen?

How that happened was, like I said, I had this political awakening and I found out –– I think on Twitter –– that Chuck DeVore was running for office here in California. And I wanted to do something locally; get involved and make a difference. So, I researched Chuck and later became administrator of the Bay Area Group for Chuck's campaign on Ning (not the official campaign website). Due to the fact that I was in on conference calls and intimately knew the people involved with his campaign –– now with a fledgling radio show –– I thought, "Maybe I'll tap into some of these contacts and see if I could get Chuck on the show." So, Chuck was on the show. I am still a staunch Chuck DeVore supporter –– a man that carries a copy of the Constitution in his breast pocket at all times!

Chuck DeVore was a guest on your show recently, was he on a few times?


Yes, he was our guest in July or last year too. Our second guest was Navy veteran and aspiring politician, Coby Dillard, founder of the blog, The Dillard Doctrine, who has been on the show a few times.

Then I started meeting people of color that were fiercely conservative and I just started asking if they would be on the show. And people would know people that would know people...and so on.

Another draw came from those promoting books and going on press junkets. Also, I think part of the attraction is our name, AACON. It was meant to be a play on ACORN; it was never meant to be this divisive hyphenated thing, but having "African-American" in our name helped with people who wanted to reach out to the black community.

In the beginning, we got the third degree from publicists and press secretaries of potential guests, asking, "How many listeners do you have?" Originally the attitude was sort of like "you're small potatoes." As we got more and more of the bigger names through relationships that we developed, then people started to take notice a little bit. Then we were featured on Blog Talk and later Radio for Conservatives (From the Right Radio) approached us to be a show on their channel. Now we can usually get interviews because of our track record: over 10,000 "listens;" a featured show; and we've been number one on BlogTalkRadio a few times.

You did this all in less than a year and you are becoming quite the conservative talk-radio star. Wow, I'm impressed!

I would say that it is totally a God thing! I truly believe that. I can also attribute it to the First Amendment and my strong belief in modeling to my kids that you can exercise free speech. I can also talk about God on the airwaves as much as I want –– for now [we both smirk]. It is not only an opportunity for me to be a political Mama –– Sarah Palin calls us, "Mama Grizzlies," but I can be a political activist as well as impart my faith.

"African-American Conservatives...Your source for conservative political news and commentary, from an African-American perspective... African-American Conservatives; the soul of the conservative movement." –– Marie Stroughter, BlogTalkRadio

Next week,Tuesday June 1, 2010 at 8:00 AM Marie interviews Judge Andrew Napolitano:
Andrew P. Napolitano joined FOX News Channel (FNC) in January 1998 and currently serves as the senior judicial analyst. He provides legal analysis on both FNC and FOX Business Network (FBN). He is also a fill in co-host for FOX & Friends regularly and co-hosts FOX News Radio's Brian and The Judge show daily.

Originally published in Blogcritics in politics
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: May 31, 2010 at 6:15 am
Interview with Marie Stroughter, Co-Founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS)
Brought to you by Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Friday, May 21, 2010

Interview With Lee Troxler, Co-Author of "Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth"

Newest book offers a scary warning: Take your money away from Obama before Obama takes it away from you!

Floyd Brown and Lee Troxler both began their careers working in the Reagan administration and before the 2008 election teamed up to pen the bestselling book, Obama Unmasked: Did Slick Hollywood Handlers Create the Perfect Candidate? In that book they predicted the stock market crash to within one month and 100 points on the Dow. Now they return with new forecasts about another looming market disaster and strategies for protecting your wealth in Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth: How to Save America's Economy and Your Own, which was released recently and is quickly cranking up the bestseller charts.


There is a backstory to this interview. Early in the writing process, Troxler asked me to dig into the research on global warming, for he had a suspicion that many of the same folks who had been peddling “global cooling” back in the 1970s had returned with a new scam to make themselves money at the expense of the gullible, liberal "believe anything" crowd. I did in fact uncover a fascinating—at times frightening—connection between Silicon Valley and senior Democratic party leaders. The authors included my findings in their book and as we unearth new information already in the works, we will be sharing it.

If you told me that after a year of blogging about politics I would be part of an unnerving, timely analysis of the U.S. economy and instrumental in exposing the special interest groups, unions, "fat cats," and others who are raping entrepreneurs and small business of their prosperity—what Brown and Troxler call “Killionaires”—my response would have been, “You’re out of your mind.” But now I’ve learned through this book, Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth, that these Killionaires have had our government in their back pockets for several presidencies in a “revisionist conspiracy to undermine capitalism and grab for wealth.” Brown and Troxler also reveal the next financial bubble—predicted to be the biggest ever—and the potential criminal elements behind cap-and-trade, which is back on top of the Obama agenda.

Considering my participation in this book, I won't be able to review it, but I convinced Troxler to give me an interview. However, I will say that it is a fast-paced and gripping whodunit that is guaranteed to get your blood boiling and rock the political world! The book is available at Amazon, major bookstores, and soon at the official website.

In your last book Obama Unmasked, you predicted the financial collapse of 2008 to within one month and 100 points on the Dow. What do you see coming in this new book, Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth?

Just recently these insiders collapsed the stock market again, as we forecast on page 127. We wrote: “In throwing trillions at the economy, there has to be at least a few billion in financial gains. And there will be. From the Fed we’ll hear cautious talk of ‘recovery’… Americans will fast and furiously shovel what remains of their wealth back into U.S. equities. Right about then, a merry band of international bankers who have been lying in wait will step out of the shadows and crash… And Mr. Obama’s economic recovery will go into the record books as a goose egg, a ‘Big O.’”

When the Dow collapsed 1000 points, all the ‘people who know’ rushed out to blame a computer glitch—knowing the public would buy it. But just as we didn’t learn the truth behind the 2008 collapse until a year later, we won’t this time. All we know are the broad outlines of what actually happened: a merry band of international bankers took the money Obama gave them for free, created a sucker’s rally in the markets, then hopped out with hundreds of billions more fleeced from gullible investors.

You have given a name to these wealth killers—you’ve called them “Killionaires.” Who are these Killionaires?

It may surprise many people to find that the majority of Killionaires have liberal and socialist beliefs, as hypocritical as that is. They agree with the revisionist view of America, and feel no guilt in asset-stripping the nation. They know that the easiest way to steal billions is to get a Senator, or a President, in their back pocket. So they are most fond of the activist presidencies of liberals like Obama and Bush (yes, Bush).

King of the Killionaires is George Soros. After crashing the English economy in 1992, he set his sights on a bigger prize—the U.S. economy. But if he was going to make a killing here, the bilious old windbag knew, he’d have to circumvent a lot of financial controls. Step one for Mr. Soros was to make friends in Washington and smear his ill-gotten gains all over the Democratic party—for they shared his vaguely anti-American, socialist beliefs and were, historically, more easily compromised.

In interviews, some Killionaire wannabes have admitted to being inspired by the 1967 Bonnie and Clyde movie with Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway—cool cats taking on the power structure. They were gorgeous, wildly liberal in real life, and they robbed banks. So why not in real life, these soulless sociopath socialists reasoned? Why not take advantage of emerging technologies to steal? First task? Tear down the real economy — which can be hard to control — and replace it with an artificial economy buttressed by fancy mathematical models all designed to create the pretense of value with salesmen paid obscene sums to convince everyone that they’d invented a perpetual prosperity machine.

People think Obama is cleaning up Wall Street, but you insist it’s all pretend. Is Obama in Wall Street’s pocket?

We’re seeing a lot of Kabuki theater in Washington and Wall Street—a big show to convince voters that action is being taken. And sure, a few high-profile heads will roll. But none of the real problems are being addressed. The big investment houses from Goldman on down are still allowed to cheat the system and front-run ordinary investors to profits.

Obama is no different than his predecessor—both beholden to Wall Street. Between them they’ve already transferred $2 trillion from taxpayers into the pockets of Killionaires.

The newest scheme is to loot Ginnie Mae the very same way they looted Fannie Mae, and let taxpayers again clean up the mess. It’s going on now. On Obama’s orders! Why? Obama wants the government to keep picking up the mortgage bills for people who can’t afford their homes—since most of them vote Democrat. And Obama needs the Killionaires to get himself reelected. Obama and his Killionaire pals spent a record $2 billion getting elected, and they will need to again. You think that kind of money comes from Main Street? Hah! Only from Wall Street.

Obama will huff and puff but the blow is just for show. No Killionaire will be inconvenienced.

You speak of an America divided, but not in the usual red state vs. blue state sense. You write of Traditionalists vs. Revisionists. What do you mean?

The “red-blue” view of America is not only simplistic—it’s dangerous. It tosses us into sports metaphor surreality and we lose clarity on what’s real. What’s real are values—specifically the values we need for a successful American tomorrow.

One set of values—we call them Traditionalist—hold that America is the best thing this world has ever known; it is to be honored and exalted even, for it has no equal in providing freedom and opportunity for all.

The other set of values—we call them Revisionist—were shaped by a single anomaly in our long history: Vietnam. Any mistakes we made in that war have become the fractured prism through which all Revisionist judgments are now made. The unquestioning acceptance of American goodness is viewed as sappy, naïve, and knuckle-dragging.

So today we have two scripts. Traditionalists celebrate the essential goodness of American institutions; Revisionists consider them corrupt and valueless. Traditionalists see America learning from her mistakes and constantly improving; Revisionists are rewriting history books to focus with vengeance on a litany of wrongs we’ve supposedly committed right back to 1607 Jamestown.

Traditionalists believe in making money the old-fashioned way—earning it; Revisionists are intent on asset-stripping a nation they have little regard for.

With scripts this divergent, there is no compromise. One must prevail.

In chapter 10 (the one I know well) on page 173 you write, "We have uncovered a disturbing and potentially criminal connection between Silicon Valley venture capitalists and the Democratic Party leadership. The revealing of even the broadest outlines of this [green energy] connection could prompt investigations into several high-level Administration officials." Is this connected to the recent devastating BP oil spill?

What are the odds of the biggest oil derrick explosion in history happening two days before Obama was to decide on extending offshore drilling licenses? One in a thousand? It’s just too coincidental to be believable. But no matter what or who caused the BP disaster, Obama did not act to contain the damage—exactly what his environmental friends wanted. That was criminal.

As for the criminal connection we wrote about, it involves the fraud and racketeering charges that will be leveled if Team Obama gives big government contracts to green companies that helped elect him. That remains to be seen.

You write that Obama is employing a sugar/sugar/shaft strategy; what is that?

Obama’s decision to spend a staggering sum—$1.7 trillion—in his first few months was entirely unprecedented. Not even Roosevelt, who faced a worse economy, tried anything so radical. So it was unprecedented, but Obama knew exactly what he was doing. Most of the cash went to his Killionaire pals who will fund his reelection—they got the sugar. Some of the cash went to the downtrodden who will give him votes in his reelection—they got the sugar. Not a billion found its way to the small business entrepreneurs who create most of the jobs—they got the shaft.

So sugar for the very rich, sugar for the lazy and poor, the shaft for entrepreneurs—it’s the Obama stay elected strategy.

In the second half of the book that’s devoted to “freeing wealth” you give investors what you call a “Personal Clawback Strategy”—can you briefly explain?

It has come to this: investors need a way to take their wealth away from Obama before Obama takes it away from them! There are legal strategies for doing this. We’ve laid them out in simple A-B-C format. This is probably the most valuable intel in the book!




To learn more about Floyd Brown, Lee Troxler, the book, and the Freeing Wealth Fellowship visit World Net Daily.

Originally published in Blogcrtics Magazine: Interview With Lee Troxler, Co-Author of Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: May 21, 2010 at 6:15 am


Floyd Brown and Lee Troxler on G. Gordon Liddy, May 17, 2010.

To hear Lee Troxler's interview on News Talk AM 1440 BILL MEYER PODCAST, which aired on Tuesday, May 18, 2010:
Lee Troxler, author of Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth how the economy was intentionally trashed, and how you can protect yourself. Open calls on the election, too.

Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Saturday, May 15, 2010

World Net Daily: Cabal killing off U.S. wealth

WND MONEY
Cabal killing off U.S. wealth
Investigation documents American economy didn't fall, it was pushed


A cabal that has been traced back almost half a century still is working – using a manipulative carbon credit scheme among other things – to kill off the wealth of the United States, according to a new investigation that has been documented in "Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth: How to Save America's Economy … and Your Own."

The work, with an official launch date Tuesday, is by author and economist Floyd Brown and broadcaster and political adviser Lee Troxler. Brown created the Willie Horton ad, considered by many the most impactful campaign commercial ever, and Troxler wrote speeches for President Reagan.

The bottom line is a warning that the last economic collapse didn't just happen, it was forced, they report.

They explain the machination consumers have seen at the highest levels of finance isn't just some cyclical phase the nation is enduring, but a capital crime, and the murder victim is the nation's wealth – "Hundreds of billions, even trillions of dollars – destroyed in order to enrich and empower beyond imagination a ruling elite of 'Killionaires' whose membership will shock even seasoned political observers."

The authors combed the wreckage of the U.S. economy for their evidence of sabotage, and now are revealing a billionaire financial complex spanning several presidential administrations that set out in conscious conspiracy to kill individual initiative in their wealth grab.

They also are warning that the economic turmoil isn't finished. In their last book they accurately predicted the 2008 financial collapse – to within one month and 100 points on the Dow. Their new forecast includes a Washington-Wall Street conspiracy, an eco-terrorist link to the BP oil catastrophe, and Goldman Sachs.

"Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth" reports that Americans need not depend on the government they support to protect them, either.

"(Obama) chose 'house upon stone' as his vision, and he told a nation that it wouldn't be easy rebuilding that house since we had 'lost trust and confidence' after years of Republican misrule," the book reports. "He's right. It won't be easy … On the very same day Timothy Geithner announced his anti-lobbyist rules he hired goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson as his chief of staff."

The authors have followed the money back to secret meetings in Silicon Valley in 2005 where these "Killionaires" conspired to create a colossal and entirely artificial market in carbon credits with the design of bilking investors of hundreds of billions of dollars when the right environmental catastrophe "could be engineered."

They went back even further, revealing from the 1960s the originas of today's political and economic problems.

And they offer suggestions, a "claw-back" strategy entrepreneurs and investors can use to face the coming years, which is expected to include more turbulence because of the continuing policy of – literally – creating money out of ink and paper.

Brown studied economics at the University of Washington under famed economist Paul Heyne, and forged his political experience working for President Reagan and Sen. Bob Dole. Now president of the Western Center for Journalism, he has authored "Obama Unmasked: Did Slick Hollywood Handlers Create the Perfect Candidate?" "Say the Right Thing," "Prince Albert: The Life and Lies of Al Gore," and "Slick Willie: Why America Cannot Trust Bill Clinton."

Troxler wrote not just speeches for Reagan but also books, "Obama Unmasked," "Hillary the Movie," "On Native Soil: The Documentary of the 9/11 Commission Report," "FahrenHYPE 9/11: Unraveling the Truth About Fahrenheit 9/11 and Michael Moore," and "Along Wit's Trail: The Humor & Wisdom of Ronald Reagan."

Posted: May 10, 2010
9:58 pm Eastern
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

The authors unite again and have just published a fast-paced and gripping read that will get your "blood boiling!" Troxler and Brown expose the Killionaires and their continuous scam –– who is really destroying America's prosperity and how the rich are getting richer and the poor more dependent on the government. And who is gets the "shaft?" Entrepreneurs and "small business" is left footing the bill. Killing Wealth is guaranteed to "rock the political world" and could be the next New York Times Best Seller. Also, "yours truly" contributed "time and talent," to certain parts of this book!
AMAZON
BARNES & NOBLE
And everywhere.

EducationNews.org:
"Brown's and Troxler's work is not your ordinary economic postmortem. While supported by depths of investigative research, it reads with the intrigue and tension of a gripping whodunit. It also offers specific strategies for freeing your wealth from the Killionaires grasping hands."

Stay Tuned; it's just getting started...

Saturday, May 8, 2010

Interview: Matt Heath, Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California

The "conscience of the Republican Party": advancing the ideals of individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise.



[Photo: Matt Heath with Ron Paul, September 2008 at the Rally for the Republic in Minneapolis]


It all started as a "typo" on one of my political blogs, which quickly stirred up my inquisitive nature and led to an interaction that brought about a pondering of my own personal beliefs and stance as it relates to “liberty”. This past month, I had the privilege of interviewing the folks from the Republican Liberty Caucus of California (RLCCA), exclusively for Blogcritics Magazine.

Because of our very own Blogcritics writer and editor, Dave Nalle, I am somewhat familiar with the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC), but I wanted to get acquainted with the pulse of the RLC in my home state of California. And no better way than from those leading this grassroots organization –– Chairman of the RLCCA, Matt Heath with the assistance of RLC Secretary Parke Bostrom. My thanks!

In summary, the RLCCA is the officially chartered California chapter of the RLC (founded in 1991). They work to advance the ideals of individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the State of California and the Republican Party.

Considering the 2010 elections are a hot topic in the political arena these days, let’s first talk about the California primary coming up next month. So far the RLCCA has endorsed three Congressional candidates: Gary Clift, Clayton Thibodeau, and John Dennis, who is in the high-profile race against Nancy Pelosi. Do you have any inside information on how this race is going and what are your predictions for the outcome?

Heath: Given the size of the Bay Area media market and the fact that Nancy Pelosi is a polarizing figure nationally, a tough, hard-hitting campaign by John Dennis will help every Republican candidate in our region. John is already generating interest and enthusiasm in San Francisco with his small government, pro-liberty message. His race will likely be a key factor in boosting Republican campaigns throughout Northern California. His campaign is going very well, and I predict that John Dennis will do better than any Republican congressional candidate has done in San Francisco in recent memory.

Additionally, for us in the RLC it is very exciting to see Dennis receive the pre-primary endorsement of many establishment Republicans in San Francisco. It shows us that we should be trying to find and recruit strong candidates rather than engaging in political debates with other Republican activists.

As you know, I had mistakenly reported that the RLC had endorsed one of the three California Senate candidates and your very astute Secretary Parke Bostrom corrected my blog. Is there a reason that the RLCCA has not endorsed Chuck DeVore, Carly Fiorina, or Tom Campbell? And do you have a personal favorite?

Heath: We work to recruit and support candidates who will reduce the size of the federal government, and also the size of state and local governments. Specifically, we try to recruit and support candidates who are fundamentally motivated by a sincere and profound respect and appreciation for the concept of human liberty –– the idea that if you are an adult, so long as you are not harming someone else, you should be able to do whatever you want. We focus on this one core issue of liberty because we believe that candidates motivated by respect for liberty will be the most effective at reducing the size and scope of government interference in our private and economic lives.

Granted, that is a somewhat subjective criterion, and each member of our board of directors has to make her or his own subjective determination as to whether a given candidate meets that standard. We do not try to endorse candidates in every contested primary. With respect to the Senate race, it appears that the RLCCA board has yet to be convinced that any of three candidates you mentioned shares our appreciation for human liberty.

Are there candidates on your radar, that others may not be aware of, who the RLCCA thinks have a lot of promise?

Heath: The RLCCA has endorsed Gary Clift (CD10), Clayton Thibodeau (CD45), Linda "Ellie" Black (AD27), and Bill Hunt for Orange County Sheriff, as well as John Dennis in San Francisco.
I feel it would be inappropriate for me to mention specific candidates that have not yet been endorsed.

Seemingly, the “Boxer match” is receiving a lot of attention –– even from President Obama, who lent his support for her last month. Do you expect that Obama will help or hinder Boxer’s campaign?

Heath: President Obama is a popular politician in California and with many Democrats. I suspect he will bring his "bully pulpit" to California in support of Barbara Boxer as often as needed in her reelection bid.

Boxer has held the California Senate seat for three terms, and California is primarily a liberal state. What are the odds that California could pull off another “Scott Brown” type victory –– marking us “red?” Or is that just hopeful thinking for us conservatives?

Heath: Boxer can be beaten, but the race will be much more clearly defined after the Republican primary election in June. And as I mentioned earlier, it appears that the RLCCA's board has yet to be convinced that any of the three Republican candidates shares our appreciation for human liberty.

So Matt, on a personal note, what drew you to the RLC and how did you become Chairman of the California chapter?

Heath: After becoming actively involved locally in the Sonoma County Republican Party, I looked for a larger Republican organization that promotes libertarian philosophy. I discovered the RLC and was inspired by their Statement of Principles and Positions.

Several other Sonoma Republicans joined me and we organized under the banner of the Republican Liberty Caucus to do political activism in our neighborhoods, on the street, and within the county Republican Party. Subsequently, in February 2009, I attended the state convention of the California Republican Party. I connected with RLC'ers from other parts of California, and was elected chairman. It has been an exciting year!




I noticed that the RLC welcomes constitutionalists, libertarians, classical liberals, and free market advocates. Will you expand on that?

Heath: All of the groups you mentioned agree that the government, and specifically the federal government, is too big. Constitutionalists believe the federal government is too big because it is doing more than is authorized by the Constitution. Classical liberals believe that people can best improve their lives without government "help" (or interference) and without the temptation and danger of becoming dependent on government welfare programs. Free market advocates believe that the government should not try to regulate, "stimulate", "bail-out" or otherwise interfere our economy. (Yet strangely some self-proclaimed "free market advocates" support macro-level government interference in the economy via the Federal Reserve and the banking cartels controlling national lending policies and the supply of fiat currency.)

So all of the above groups believe that the federal government should be significantly smaller than it is today. That is a huge piece of common ground. The RLC comes into the picture because we take that common ground and work to turn it into a specific political strategy: we work as a caucus within the Republican Party to promote candidates that support these ideals.

Since I consider myself a conservative, what caught my attention was that the RLC welcomes "tolerant conservatives". How would you describe a “tolerant conservative”?

Heath: We welcome all who support the RLC Statement of Principles and Positions. And, to answer your question, I would describe a “tolerant conservative” as a fiscal conservative who believes the government should not attempt to regulate the private lives of citizens. By “regulate” I mean things like: restricting freedom of speech, compelling military service, interfering in relationships between consenting adults, outlawing adult consumption of recreational drugs, and requiring the use of a national ID card.

I’m glad you brought up the topic of “government regulation” –– two areas in particular. I have heard that the RLC gets a certain amount of flak in the GOP in other states as being against the war on drugs and relatively pro-gay. Do you have less of a problem with that in California?

Heath: Perhaps California is more tolerant on those issues. I am not aware of our positions on those issues causing any official strife with the California Republican Party (CRP). However, there may be individuals or other caucuses within the CRP that disagree with some of our positions. This is only to be expected and is not unusual in any way.

Related to the specific issues you mentioned:
I suspect most RLC'ers believe the federal war on drugs is unconstitutional. Back in the 1930's we as a country understood the Constitution well enough to know that attempted federal regulation of alcohol required a Constitutional amendment. Unfortunately, it seems that America today does not understand her Constitution as well as she used to.

As for the claim that the RLC is "relatively pro-gay", I suspect most RLC'ers believe that the purpose of government is to secure the natural rights of each individual in these 50 states, so that we as individuals may enjoy Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

We take our inspiration from the Declaration of Independence: "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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men."

Expanding on the RLC and the GOP’s rapport, I hear that the RLC in some states, most notably Florida, has had conflicts with the state GOP. How is your relationship with the state GOP?

Heath: Here in California the RLCCA has a growing relationship with the California Republican Party. Many RLCCA members work closely with their respective county Republican parties; so it is only natural that the RLCCA works closely within the California Republican Party.

At the September 2009 convention of the California Republican Party, a resolution supporting Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" bill (HR 1207) and the companion bill in the Senate (SB 604) passed with overwhelming support. Many RLCCA members worked hard to bring that resolution to the CRP and to get it passed. (I should again thank Assemblyman Chuck DeVore for his support in that effort.) It was very gratifying to work with the CRP to call for an audit of the Federal Reserve, as an audit is the first step towards developing an honest currency and restoring economic confidence in America.

Speaking of “parties,” what are you thoughts about the Tea Party movement, its relevance and impact on the political scene?

Heath: It is exciting to see so many new people jumping into the political process through the Tea Party movement. There is a common theme with the individuals who attend Tea Party events: they believe government, especially at the federal level, is too big and encroaches too much on our private lives. While the Tea Party has a lot of new and exciting energy, it will be interesting to see how the many diverse groups of the Tea Party movement organize over the next few years, and what long term strategies they will rally around to achieve their goals.

What are the RLC and/or your personal thoughts about our current administration and its direction –– what many deem to be an intrusive expansion of government on many fronts?

Heath: The RLC is, of course, no fan of the Obama administration as they continue down a course of greater federal government power over individual American lives.

Personally, I believe the Obama administration is just a continuation of the Bush administration with regards to the scope of the federal government: continuing interventionist foreign policy, expanding executive powers, ongoing manipulation of the free market, continuing growth of federal health care programs (after all, it was President Bush who created Medicare Part D), to mention just a few examples of the similarities.

In closing, what can we expect from the RLCCA in the near future?

Heath: You can expect the RLCCA to continue to grow in numbers and influence among Californian Republicans. If any activists reading this are inspired by our work thus far, they should contact us via our website to become active in the RLC in their local counties. You can also join the RLCCA on Facebook and Twitter.

Exclusive Interview for Blogcritics Magazine: Matt Heath, Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: May 07, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Also, on National Broadside

Thanks to Matt and Parke (and the RLC; including my friend, Dave Nalle) for all they do to advance individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise: something us, conservatives embrace as well. And a special thanks for taking the time out of their busy schedules to do this interview.