South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham believes that Tea Party lacks “a coherent vision for governing the country”. He believes therefore that Tea Party will soon “Die out”. At least he told that to The New York Time Magazine on June 28. Dear Senator, I strongly suspect you forgetting what this country is all about: people do not have to have a vision of governing. People ARE governing. And you are governed by the people, not the other way around, whether you like it or not. The only reason you are (still) in the Senate is that people have entrusted you with the duty to guard their interests the way they want it. If you have somehow forgotten it you should probably start thinking of early retirement.

Yet Senator Graham doesn’t stop there. He claims that “Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting elected as a Republican today” and “We don’t have a lot of Reagan-type leaders in our party” anyway. On one substance I agree with you Senator: we don’t have any leaders in your party, i.e. arrogant self-representatives in Washington, like you. And we don’t need them. We have (and will have more) leaders among people in this country. And “unsustainable” as you call it, Tea Party is the people. And they are “the tip of the iceberg of an American awakening“, as your own colleague, South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint has astutely noted. I have good news for you Senator Graham: not only Ronald Reagan had he been alive, would have gotten elected now, but it’s inevitable that another Reagan whoever one is will be the one in 2012.

As to you personally, Senator Lindsey Graham, I do believe that your time has come. Certainly as you have been reelected in 2008 (together with president Obama) you have four more years of guaranteed tenure. But nothing is eternal. And when your own reelection comes up you will recall what happened to the Penn. Sen. Arlen Specter, Utah Sen. Robert Bennett and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist. But it will be too late Senator Graham. It already is.

For years in innumerable talks with people with leftist views I have been looking for a simple way to lay down my position to spare myself lagging discussions  doomed from the start with neither side having a slightest chance of convincing each other. Such a cut if found would put an end to the endless arguing and more so would leave the ball in their court (not that the latter is of much an importance as liberals normally avoid arguing in support of their position).  Incidentally I have bumped into the idea. It was so simple that I was astonished how I could have not possibly thought of it earlier.

To find out whether the person is liberal all you have to do is ask the question:

“If you believe something is right should it be implemented in the society?”

If you receive the answer “yes” you are talking with a liberal. The argument is simple. Any person who believes in Constitution, freedom, and law instead of answering right away would start asking questions such as “Who decides what’s right?” “On what basis does somebody impose the decision on others?” while straight unequivocal “yes” implies that all other questions have been answer beforehand: “I (government) decide”, “I (government) have the right”, etc.

I have tried asking the question. It works 100%. A liberal starts answering and (unless it’s an absolute lunatic) immediately becomes confused as the conflict between his beliefs and the outcome looks ridiculous. Not that I have ever succeeded in changing their position – it would take ages and probably personal impact. But it saved time. And that alone was good enough.

Call your Senator and tell him/her to defeat unconstitutional attack on  American democracy – DISCLOSE Act.

In a desperate attempt to save themselves from the landslide defeat in November elections, Democrats in the House today passed so called DISCLOSE Act – an outrageous attack on the First Amendment of the Constitution. Compiling together series of modifications specifically tailored to block grass-roots organizations and private businesses from the participation in election campaigns, while excluding labor unions and left-wing organizations, the liberal Democratic leadership managed to twist enough hands of their moderate colleagues to obtain minimum number of voices sufficient for passing the bill. In order to calm down nervous Blue Dog Democrats the leadership designed the bill by adding strong lobbying groups (such as National Rifle Association) to the list of exemptions.

It’s important to note that among other bargaining chips in the negotiations with moderate Democrats the House Leadership used “assurance” from leading Democratic Senators that their chamber will vote for the bill before August recess – to make the bill to go into effect in time for the November elections. This promise – though sounds solid and encouraging – does not YET present a sustainable merit for the passage. The reason is simple: Democrats need at least one renegade Republican to shut down the filibuster. And in the current toxic pre-election environment Republicans (including the moderates) happened to stand united against any attempt by Liberals to pass even less controversial attempts to hijack the democracy process.

Yes, the DISCLOSE Act, as the attack on free speech, as unequally used against different entities is unconstitutional. Yes, it won’t stand in court. And, if passed, it will be undoubtedly challenged and defeated. The problem is – that will happen only after the elections. And this is precisely what the Democrats are trying to do – silence us right now and save themselves from being defeated. And this is just what we should fight against, by making sure each Republican senator – whether moderate or conservative – votes against the bill when it reaches the Senate.

We urge you: call your senator and make him/her help defeat the anti-free speech DISCLOSE Act. You can look here if you want to add some “meat” to your argument.

Obama’s attempt to take advantage of people’s tragedy – losing their businesses, income, life style – as the opportunity to promote cap-and-tax assault in his oil spill speech was outrageous. Especially when such a tragedy is hijacked not by a legislator but by the chief executive of the country.

Dear Mr. President – you have been elected to do the dirty job when one comes up. It is much easier to sit in a legislative body – House or Senate – raising your hand knowing that you share collective responsibility with the luxury (even if imaginary) of having the day-by-day decision-making process comfortable. Mr. President, nobody made you to take the job. You could have stayed in the Senate indefinitely freely collecting the unlimited benefits and dodging the responsibility, with the liberal People Republic of Illinois behind your back as a stone-wall socialist machine. You choose not to. You decided to make out life better, you would show us how to live a better life, you would teach us what the better life is, you would save the planet. But the job you have taken appeared to be less about saving us from ourselves – Congress would do it for you – and more about diving into the garbage, this time in the form of sludge of brown foam relentlessly rolling over once beautiful beached of Louisiana, Alabama, and Florida.

President is a difficult job, sometimes dirty. Dirtier than the one of a legislator certainly. But you asked for it and you got it. So do it! We won’t let you pass your cap-and-tax, you may forget about it. You have to be with people of Louisiana and Alabama – not just of San Francisco or Cambridge. When the 2012 season comes Cambridge and San Francisco won’t matter much for your reelection, but Florida will. So keep this in mind and do the job for your country, or our job to oust you in the next elections will not be a challenge.

Tea Party Patriots issued a statement that lately various attempts have been made by individuals unknown to public to form local third parties as a proxy of the established Tea Party organizations. The intentions of such individuals are (at best) inconsistent as the fate of a third party has always been doomed in the American political system with the only outcome for a popular movement behind such a party has been loss of its electoral viability. It wouldn’t be hard to imagine, therefore, that as a unique tool for splitting votes, the third party creation may present a great opportunity for the unpopular major party – currently Democrats – to try and hijack the idea. It is particularly convenient with the Tea Party being non-organized – yet popular grass roots movement:

There is much talk of the formation of a third political party based on the tea party movement.. Unscrupulous individuals have formed third parties utilizing the tea party name in an attempt to play dirty politics and trick unsuspecting voters into voting for candidates who are being put on the ballot simply to split the votes.. The history of third party movements in this country is one of division and defeat. We believe that it is instead time for all Americans to rise up and demand appropriate reform within their own existing parties. The mechanisms exist for citizens to participate in their parties, and to drive their parties in the right direction.

It’s done. It’s people who decide, not the “leaders”. People decide who their leaders are. Nevada has just decided. Sharron Angle is Tea Party Republican nominee for the Senate! Now Democrats feel glory and relief: Sharron Angle is just one conservative wacky lunatic, they say: she won’t hold it against the LEADER, Lord Reid. Well Mr. Reid, be careful what you wish for. You wanted a wacky nut over Republican establishment – you got it. But what does “wacky” stand for? Is it somebody passionately devoted to a small annoying brochure, US Constitution? If so then Reagan was wacky too. Gosh, how shocked moonbats were to see him win.

Be prepared Mr. Reid. Sharron Angle was nobody, with less than 5% one month ago. And yesterday she cared primaries with 9% gap! Tea Party helped her. But it wasn’t just Tea Party – the primary voters supported her across the board. Or I’d rather say, supported themselves. And it’s not one who “deserves” the support will be elected in November, but one who will share the victory with the people. It will not be Republican vs. Democrat – it will be People vs. Harry Reid.

Here’s another Tea Party Candidate: Nevada Republican Primary, June 8, 2010. Which is 5 days from now. A month ago Sharron Angle held just 5% Republican votes, far behind other leading candidates – virtually nobody, against big shot Republican establishment. Here’s where she is now: clear front runner! It was a rocket rise. Who did it? Who helped here? As always – people. You. It started with Tea Party Express endorsement. Then followed by more than 20 other organizations.

Now, liberals say: o great! Let them (Republicans) bring their radical to face Harry Reid in November. They are positive conservative will be much easier to knock down than “moderate”. Is it so? This position assumes the people are scared of the real actions. Of helping America remember the main principal of its foundation – Constitutional Republic. Liberals believe people will be more likely to fall for “moderate” republican, thus making it more dangerous for them. Moderate, ha? Who’s that? Disguised democrat, is it not? But if they are so sure why people would vote for a moderate? They have an open democrat: Mr. Reid. So don’t wary: we are not stupid. We will vote for what is good for American people, not for Hollywood or Harvard faculty. We are not scared of conservatives.

TaxCtl.com made its contribution to Sharron Angle’s campaign. We want to take our country back. And we will!

This is who we pay our money to protect us against jihad. Or, rather protect jihad against us. The latter looks a little more modern and intellectually attractive. This is if you believe John Brennan, Obama’s “counterterrorism” adviser. Here are his words:

“…jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community.”

And of course, as for such a “legitimate tenet”, where else would it be more natural to purify oneself than in the motherhood of all “communities” – al-Quds, which we, insensitive, right wing nuts, arrogantly address to as Jerusalem. Needless to say, Mr. Brennan didn’t turn down expectations of the legitimate holy strugglers by making a sentimental confession during the taxpayer-sponsored event at Islamic Center at New York University: “the city I have come to love most is al-Quds”.

We are in the beginning of the America liberation from apologetic, socialist “culture” of self-destructing nature. Tuesday Republican nomination victory of the Tea Party candidate Rand Paul is just one step in that direction. We have a long way to go. In fact, lots of things have already happened. After the Tea Party supported republican candidate Marco Rubio in Florida has come up from nowhere and made it virtually impossible for the liberal “republican” governor Charlie Crist to win the nomination, Crist dropped out of the Republican Party and declared his bid as an independent candidate. And independent here means unsupported. He is already going down in public polls and will keep doing so because you cannot fool people around.

We have also proven we have a say in deciding how to lead our country during Utah Republican convention by ousting the sitting senator, another “moderate” Republican, Bob Bennett who, among other things, has supported the bank bailout program.

Tea Party is on the rise. Who would seriously consider a Tea Party candidate to kick out a so called “moderate” republican out of the window a year ago. And here we are. After Scott Brown’s victory in January everything suddenly became possible. With Rand Paul’s overwhelming takeover of the Kentucky republican nomination, it is clear now: we are here! It’s harder to find words to express what’s happened better than what Rand Paul said himself: “I have a message from the tea party. A message that is loud and clear and does not mince words. We’ve come to take our government back”.