Dealing with personal paradox

This is something I meditate on regularly. How can I speak up on issues I find important when they seem to counter to each other?   How can I assemble a workable world view when the various parts are in conflict with each other?

 

For example, I spend most of my days trying to help Life express itself by removing distortions, imbalances, or stagnation in the flow of chi through the skeleton, skin, mind and nervous system.  It would be easy to assume, and you would be right that I am against abortion.

I am a veteran, father, Oathkeeper, watchdog, guardian and other duties.  Which explains why I am in strong support of the 2nd amendment of the formative contract that allows a government to exist among a free people.

How do these seemingly opposite positions come together in a single world view?  I’ll answer this in the comments later today.  Please feel free to chime in.

DrD

Please join me in Jefferson City, Wednesday January 5, 2011

PLEASE JOIN US AT THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED RALLY

Let me know if you need a ride.

Over the past 2 years,  we have made a major impact on the political landscape.   Last summer, thousands signed our petition for Prop C asserting Missouri’s citizens rights under the 10th amendment. Prop C passed by 71% pushing back Obamacare and fueling the nationwide uprising that led to the historic election on November 2, 2010.

 

Hundreds more signed the Missouri Leadership Project petition calling for fair leadership in the Missouri Senate.  The 2011 Missouri General Assembly and their new leadership will be sworn in on January 5.

Please join us in welcoming them at
The Consent of the Governed Rally
Rotunda of the Missouri Capital on January 5

 

The goals of the rally are simple and sincere: To celebrate a revival of political concern and involvement among Missouri citizens, rejoice in the victories we have witnessed in 2010, welcome and encourage our incoming freshmen representatives, highlight strategic legislation for the coming session, and commit ourselves to working with our elected officials for the good of our state.

 

As we welcome the freshmen legislators, we will remind them and the veteran lawmakers alike that they are there at the Consent of the Governed.

 

We want them to know that we will be involved; we will be watching; and we will be a resource for those who seek to promote greater liberty and prosperity.

 

In short, we want to tell them, “We’re from the People and we’re here to help!”

 

The Missouri Leadership Project is a cooperative effort of dozens of independent Missouri patriot groups, including Campaign for Liberty, who are not bound by organization, but rather by the common desire to empower average citizens to influence the legislative process. Although the many groups may focus on different issues, they all realize that ensconced power often will squeeze the people out of the process.

 

For that reason, the Leadership Project, as a collaboration of independent groups, seeks fair and open debate in the legislative process.

 

This is your personal invitation,
however the rally is for all Missouri patriots,
so please invite your friends.

 

The rally begins at 10:00 am on January 5 and continues until 11:30. The program will highlight key conservative issues presented by several Missouri patriots. Some of the speakers are:

 

Rep. Ed Emery, Keynote Speaker

Dave Roland
David Linton
Steve Rupp
Bev Ehlen
Mitch Hubbard
Bev Martin
Carl Bearden

 

 

Rally attendees will receive a legislative packet. Starting at 9:30 am we will help you find the names of your legislators and directions to their offices. I encourage you to go meet them and let them know you are watching their votes this year. Dress professionally and be respectful. I hope you leave the capital knowing your legislator’s names.  By the end of the session in May, I hope your legislators know your name and the issues that are important to you.

 

2011 and 2012 present a unique time in history.

We have the opportunity to
re-define the proper role of government.

 

I believe 2011 and 2012 will be the greatest opportunity in our lifetime to actually shrink government,reduce regulations, and get government out of people’s lives.

 

The key to our success
is your involvement over the next 2 years.

 

 

Campaign for Liberty will be actively involved in several Missouri legislative issues this session. We will keep you informed via email and our website;   Missouri Campaign for Liberty

 

Please share this message with your contact list and invite other groups to participate. We want to help start the new legislative session with a strong message of unity and support for the cause of liberty.

 

 

Paul Hamby

Maysville Missouri

 

Sponsors of Consent of the Governed Rally
(the list is growing daily)

Franklin County Patriots Missouri Campaign for Liberty Missouri First
Concerned Women for America Jefferson County Tea Party Sullivan 9/12
Missouri Sovereignty Project Crawford County Campaign for Liberty Warren County Patriots
Branson Tea Party Coalition Eureka Tea Party Lebanon Tea Party
Mid-MO Patriots K&N Patriots Buffalo Tea Party
Capitol Tea Party Patriots Show Me Tea Central Camdenton Tea Party
Lake Area Conservative Club Callaway Tea Party Mexico Tea Party
Sikeston Tea Party We the People of St. Francois  County

 

My opinions on the issues facing Missouri voters this November 2nd

Here is my opinion on the upcoming Missouri amendments and propositions.  You probably already know this, but an amendment changes the law of the land, and a propositions changes the legal code which tells government employees how to enforce the law.

Constitutional Amendment 1 (Proposed by legislation)

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?

YES I support this effort however I believe the exemption is unconstitutional so it probably will be challenged if it passes.

Constitutional Amendment 2 (Proposed by legislation) Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require that all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens who are former prisoners of war and have a total service-connected disability be exempt from property taxes?

NO I do not support this measure because it creates a special status situation.  The 4th amendment of the US Constitution explains the responsibility of American government to respect the rights of private property.  When you register and pay your government according to how much property you control, this basic right turns into a government granted prev ledge.  This should read “all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens shall be exempt from property taxes.”

Constitutional Amendment 3Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?
YES I support this because it uses the constitution to prevent government invasion into our lives and how we manage our private property.

Proposition A (Proposed by initiative petition) Earnings Taxes

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets;

• require voters in cities that currently have an earnings tax to approve continuation of such tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every 5 years thereafter;

• require any current earnings tax that is not approved by the voters to be phased out over a period of 10 years; and,

• prohibit any city from adding a new earnings tax to fund their budget?”

YES I support this.  Government should be funded by consumption taxes collected by the merchants benefiting from the security and productivity increases allowed by the existence of government.  A free American should never be required to report his earnings to his government at any level.

Proposition B (Proposed by initiative petition) Dog Kennels & Owners – Agriculture

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles;

• prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and

• create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations?”

NO I appose this for many reasons.  The most dominant is the fact that we already have good laws regarding this industry.  This law opens the door for government interference in the private business of the people living in Missouri.

October 26, 2010 Subscribe | Unsubscribe

Senator Luann Ridgeway – Serving Clay County
Website | Contact Me | Biography | Newsroom

 

Tuesday, November 2nd General Election Day 

Statewide Ballot Measures

On Tuesday, November 2nd, Missourians across the state will head to the polls to cast their vote in this year’s general election.  You will be voting on candidates for various offices, plus you have the opportunity to vote on several proposals that, if adopted, will change our state laws or Constitution. These ballot measures cover topics ranging from taxes to regulations on agriculture. I want to provide you with a brief outline of these proposals to help you make informed choices on election day.

Constitutional Amendment 1 (Proposed by legislation)

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require the office of county assessor to be an elected position in all counties with a charter form of government, except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999?

It is estimated this proposal will have no costs or savings to state or local governmental entities. (Estimate by State Auditor.) Of the two counties with a charter form of government and an appointed assessor, this proposal affects only St. Louis County (Jackson County is exempted). By 74-26%, St. Louis County voters passed a ballot proposal in August to elect their county assessor, which is also the intent of the proposed constitutional amendment.

Clay County voters currently elect our assessor.  However, there have been proposals to change Clay County to a charter form of government.  Depending on how the charter is drafted, it could remove the power of Clay County residents to elect our assessor. If you are okay with the possibility that our county assessor could be hired by other elected officials (and therefore not elected by the voters), you may choose to vote “no”. On the other hand, if you want to ensure that our county assessor is always elected and therefore directly accountable to the voters, you should vote “yes”.

Constitutional Amendment 2 (Proposed by legislation) Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to require that all real property used as a homestead by Missouri citizens who are former prisoners of war and have a total service-connected disability be exempt from property taxes?

The number of qualified former prisoners of war and the amount of each exemption are unknown, however, because the number who meet the qualifications is expected to be small, the cost to local governmental entities should be minimal. Revenue to the state blind pension fund may be reduced by $1,200. (Estimate by State Auditor.)  Most property taxes go to public schools and the estimated reduction to schools and all local governments is $186,717.

Constitutional Amendment 3Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prevent the state, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing any new tax, including a sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or any other real estate?

If approved, this proposed constitutional amendment would prohibit a new tax, including a sales tax, upon the sale or transfer of real estate.  Since these transactions are not currently taxed, the adoption of this amendment would have no impact on state or local tax revenues.  Opponents of this measure tend to be those who generally don’t like carving out more items for tax exemption, which further complicates our tax code.  Also, many people would like to see some form of “Fair Tax” imposed in Missouri, which would eliminate the state income tax and replace it with a broad-based sales tax, which may include some form of taxation on the sale of real estate.   If your views fall into either one of these categories, you may choose to vote “No”.  Supporters of this amendment want to ensure that real estate transactions continue to remain tax-free.  A “yes” vote supports this position.

Proposition A (Proposed by initiative petition) Earnings Taxes

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• repeal the authority of certain cities to use earnings taxes to fund their budgets;

• require voters in cities that currently have an earnings tax to approve continuation of such tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every 5 years thereafter;

• require any current earnings tax that is not approved by the voters to be phased out over a period of 10 years; and,

• prohibit any city from adding a new earnings tax to fund their budget?”

The proposal could eliminate certain city earnings taxes. For 2010, Kansas City and the City of St. Louis budgeted earnings tax revenue of $199.2 million and $141.2 million, respectively. Reduced earnings tax deductions could increase state revenues by $4.8 million. The total cost or savings to state and local governmental entities is unknown. (Estimate by State Auditor.) St. Louis and Kansas City collect earnings tax from those who live in or work in these cities. This proposal would allow voters in these cities to decide whether to continue or phase out the earnings tax. Also, this proposal would prohibit any other cities from enacting an earnings tax.

If you support the ability of cities to tax your earnings, then you would vote “no” as this vote will continue to allow earnings taxes. If you want to eliminate the Kansas City Earnings Tax (which equals 1% of your wages) or at least want the chance to vote on whether this tax should be kept or repealed, you should vote “yes”.  Also, if you want to prevent other cities around the state (including Liberty, Smithville, Gladstone, etc.) from ever imposing an earnings tax on your income, you should also vote “yes”.

Proposition B (Proposed by initiative petition) Dog Kennels & Owners – Agriculture

“Shall Missouri law be amended to:

• require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles;

• prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and

• create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations?”

It is estimated state governmental entities will incur costs of $654,768 (on-going costs of $521,356 and one-time costs of $133,412). Some local governmental entities may experience costs related to enforcement activities and savings related to reduced animal care activities. (Estimate by State Auditor.) This proposal is backed by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which has become a very controversial organization.  It is also backed by local animal rights activists.  Interestingly, I received an e-mail from such an activist, who had this to say about the measure: “Admittedly there are both pros and cons to the intricacies of this particular proposition. It is not written as thoroughly and as perfectly as all animal welfare advocates would hope, and it IS another law in a pile of laws that have not been successfully enforced throughout our state. In addition, if all goes as planned, many mills will close due to not being willing or able to abide by the new regulations which will result in thousands of dogs being displaced and needing homes. Missouri shelters probably WILL see an increase in intake should this pass…. Are we certain that all puppy mills will be “cleaned up” and/or “wiped out” if Prop B passes? No, we’re not.”

According to the Missouri Farm Bureau (which generally supports all Missouri agriculture interests) this ballot proposal would impose “unaffordable and unnecessary regulations on reputable dog breeders. Moreover, breeders who are bad actors that do not comply with existing laws and regulations will not be affected by more regulations.” The Missourians for Animal Care Coalition (www.missourifac.com), including MFB, opposes Prop. B and supports the newly formed Alliance for Truth (www.alliancefortruth.com).

It is generally thought that this measure will pass, even though both proponents and opponents of the measure agree that this will be just another law that won’t be enforced.  Why?  Because the enforcement is mostly at the county or municipal level and, for whatever reason, current laws just aren’t enforced by many county prosecutors.  There are probably as many reasons for this as there are prosecutors (strained budgets require them to concentrate on crimes against persons is one I’ve heard).  Other opponents are concerned that this law is only the beginning of the HSUS agenda that they believe will lead to more laws preventing standard practices for dairy, beef, poultry and pork production.  This issue is very emotional as no one wants to see animals suffer.  However, both supporters and opponents of this measure seem to agree that the outcome won’t do much to stop “bad actors” involved in dog breeding or kenneling.

 

 

Contact Information
Capitol Office
State Capitol Building 

Room 221
Jefferson City, MO  65101

 

Website:
http://www.senate.mo.gov/ridgeway
Phone Number:
(toll-free) 866.875.8348  

573.751.2547

 

 

 

Missouri Vaccine Exemption Forms 2010 school year

Contrary to rumors begin spread by some employees calling themselves officials at local schools you DO NOT need to vaccinate your children for them to attend school.   The statute has changed some.

Here are the statutes covering vaccine exemption in Missouri.

https://www.sos.mo.gov/adrules/csr/previous/19csr/19csr699/19c20-28a.pdf

Here is a cut out of the exact language.

2. Religious exemption. A child shall be

exempted from the immunization requirements
of this rule as provided in section
167.181, RSMo if one (1) parent or guardian
objects in writing to the school administrator
that immunization of that child violates
his/her religious beliefs. This exemption on
Department of Health Form Imm.P.11A shall
be placed on file with the school immunization
health record.
Here is a picture of the form.

Your school should have copies of this form on hand.  Don’t be surprised if they don’t.  Cut and past this one, print it out and sign it.  It is a legal document and must be accepted in place of a shot record for your child.

Proposition C made a strong statement that we the people will decide what is good for us.  We refuse government mandates when it comes to health care.

Please let me know if I can help further.

DrD

Judge denies motion to remove prop C from the August 3 ballot

As you are probably aware, liberal special interest groups filed a lawsuit to remove Proposition C—the Health Care Freedom Act—from the August 3 ballot.

I’m happy to report that their effort has failed.  Yesterday, a Cole County judge rejected their challenge, ensuring that Missourians will have the right to make their voice heard on the federal health care bill in less than 3 weeks. I have included the Associated Press article below.

For more information about Proposition C, please visit www.mohealthfreedom.org.

Judge upholds Missouri health-care ballot measure
Associated Press
July 16, 2010

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — A Missouri judge on Friday rejected a legal challenge to an Aug. 3 ballot measure that, if approved by voters, would put Missouri in conflict with a key provision of the new federal health care law.

Cole County Circuit Judge Paul Wilson dismissed a lawsuit that had sought to strike the proposal from the ballot on grounds that lawmakers violated the state constitution in their crafting of the legislation. The ruling could be appealed.

The Missouri measure proposes a state law barring governments from requiring people to have health insurance or from penalizing people for paying their health bills with their own money. It would conflict with a requirement of the new federal health care law that most people must have health insurance or face fines by 2014.

Missouri’s election essentially would be the nation’s first statewide popularity vote on the health care law backed by President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress. But its legal affect is questionable, because federal laws generally supersede those in states.

The lawsuit claimed Missouri’s measure violates state constitutional requirements that legislation contain a clear title with a single subject that is not changed from its original purpose.

In court arguments Tuesday, plaintiffs’ attorney Chip Gentry argued the ballot measure posed an unconstitutional conundrum for voters by forcing them to cast a single “yes” or “no” vote for what really is a two-part question.

Besides banning government-mandated health insurance, the Missouri measure would allow insurance companies to voluntarily dissolve. The provision on insurance mandates and wording referring the measure to the August ballot were added in the Senate to a House bill that originally dealt only with insurance company liquidations.

The lawsuit claimed the bill’s title of “relating to insurance” is so broad it is meaningless. But Wilson wrote in a decision issued after the close of business Friday that the Missouri Supreme Court has upheld numerous bills with far broader titles.

Wilson said both parts of the legislation relate to insurance and so satisfy the constitution’s requirement of a single subject. The judge also rejected the lawsuit’s assertion that legislators changed the bill’s original purpose by adding the section about health insurance mandates.

“The bill’s original purpose was to regulate insurance and insurance companies,” Wilson wrote in his ruling. “This purpose remained the same.”

Wilson also rejected arguments against the auditor’s financial estimate for the ballot measure and the timing by which the secretary of state distributed the ballot measure language to local election officials.

The judge’s decision largely agreed with the arguments of State Solicitor Jim Layton, a former co-worker in the attorney general’s office. Wilson was appointed to the court in January by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon, for whom he had worked since 1996 – first in the attorney general’s office and then in the governor’s office.

Missouri bills typically go to the governor to be signed or vetoed. But the Republican-led Legislature bypassed Nixon on the health insurance legislation by sending it directly to the ballot.

Missouri Government Plots Undercover Sting Operations Against Families Selling Raw Milk

As many of you know, I use only raw milk in my house.  The following article explains the insane assault on my right to choose what foods I feed my children happening right here in Missouri!  If you care about this issue please take the steps laid out here to help me protect access to the wonderful safe food product.

Missouri Government Plots Undercover Sting Operations Against Families Selling Raw Milk

Monday, December 07, 2009
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles…)

http://www.naturalnews.com/027675_raw_milk_Missouri.html

(NaturalNews) Imagine being watched by two undercover cops as you engage in an illicit deal in a deserted parking lot. The buyer hesitantly hands you some cash. You flash a look over your shoulder, just to make sure the coast is clear, then you hand over the contraband. Neither of you says a word. You just nod, acknowledging the deal is done, then you head back to your car and buckle up for the drive home.

But before you can even put the car into drive, a screeching formation of police cars, surrounds you, sirens wailing. Armed officers leap from their vehicles, guns drawn and sunglasses glaring. “Come out with your hands up!” they shout.

You slowly open the driver’s door of your car and inch out of your seat with both hands raised in surrender, cowering behind the open door. “What did I do, officer? What’s my crime?”

Their answer comes back loud and intimidating: “SELLING RAW MILK!”

Springfield Missouri: Where farmers are branded criminals

The above description is a dramatization of real events that happened recently in Springfield, Missouri, where the state has decided to spend considerable taxpayer resources running a sting operating against a family that was caught dealing – gulp! – raw milk in a parking lot.

Yes, both the Missouri Dept. of Health and the state Attorney General (Chris Koster) have decided that prosecuting a farm family for illegally “trafficking” raw milk should be at the top of their list of priorities. The family being targeted by state officials is the Bechard family, of Armand and Teddi Bechard, and their children Joseph, Hananiah, Kazia and Katie.

The name of the cow offering the milk is reportedly “Misty.”

As the Springfield, Missouri News-Leader paper reports, “Two undercover investigators with the Springfield-Greene County Health Department allegedly caught two of the couple’s daughters on two occasions selling a gallon of milk each from a Springfield parking lot. Charges followed in municipal court.”

In case you’re not yet sure what you’re reading here, note carefully that these daughters were not caught selling crack, meth or crank. They weren’t dealing second-hand pharmaceuticals to yuppie school kids. They weren’t selling e.coli-contaminated hamburger meat, cancer-causing diet sodas (made with aspartame) or canned soups laced with MSG. They weren’t even selling broiler chickens contaminated with salmonella — just as you can find in every grocery store in America. Nope, they were selling raw milk. You know, the bovine mother’s milk, unpasteurized, unprocessed, non-homogenized and wholly pure, natural and innocent. The stuff America was raised on. The stuff your parents fed you when you were a kid, if your family was lucky enough to have a cow.

In Missouri today, selling such a natural product is now apparently a criminal act. What’s next? A ban on farm-fresh eggs because the Dept. of Health doesn’t control their quality? The outlawing of raw broccoli because broccoli contains natural anti-cancer medicine?

Fortunately, the Bechard family is fighting back. As reported by the News-Leader:

“They will not sign a consent order to make the state’s complaint go away and they’re defending themselves against the city charges, too. They’ve gotten legal help from the The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit organization made up of farmers and consumers pooling resources to fight for the rights of family farmers trying to get unprocessed food to consumers who want it.”

A view from the Missouri-born Health Ranger

I grew up in Raytown, Missouri, just a few miles from Springfield. I spent more than a few summers on a farm near St. Louis, where we would milk the cows, gather fresh eggs from the chickens, and fish for catfish in the pond. I’m not exactly a farm boy, but I’m familiar enough with living off the land to know the difference between real food and processed food (a distinction the Missouri Dept. of Health still hasn’t gleaned…)

When I grew up in Raytown, there were fresh-food farms within driving distance where we could get fresh milk, eggs and vegetables from small family operations. It was a way of life for many families living in the suburbs of Kansas City, and none of us could have imagined then that families selling fresh milk would one day be treated like criminal contraband dealers by overzealous law state officials.

Yet another victimless “crime”

The effort to criminalize sellers of raw milk is misguided on so many levels that it just begs to be called out as perhaps one of the worst uses of taxpayer dollars yet dreamed up by clueless bureaucrats. For starters, raw milk is clearly sold as “raw milk” — there’s no mislabeling here. The people buying the milk know very well they’re buying raw milk. In fact, they go to great lengths to seek out raw milk in order to benefit from its numerous health advantages over processed, pasteurized milk.

Secondly, any serious crime worth investigating requires a victim. But there’s no victim in the “crime” of selling raw milk. The family farms sell their milk at a fair price, and a knowledgeable consumer purchases the raw milk, knowing exactly what they’re buying for their dollar. Where’s the victim here? (Misty the cow, perhaps? Probably not, as cows on family farms are treated far better than cows in most dairy factories.)

This raw milk persecution attempt is yet another example of a “victimless crime” being invented, then pursued by overzealous state officials who clearly have nothing useful to pursue (or who have a serious problem setting priorities).

In a world where children are being poisoned by aspartame, senior citizens are being drugged into zombie-like states in nursing homes, where school boys are being dosed with “speed” amphetamine ADHD drugs, bacon is laced with a cancer-causing chemical known as sodium nitrite and two-thirds of the broiler chickens sold in grocery stores are contaminated with salmonella, are you telling me that the friendly selling of raw milk in a parking lot is at the top of the list of “crimes” being investigated by the Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster and his overworked staff?

Seriously?

It takes a wild leap across the chasm of wrong vs. right to arrive at the bewildering conclusion that a couple of farm girls selling two gallons of raw milk deserves investigators, a sting operation, a Dept. of Health inquiry and the attention of the state Attorney General. It almost makes me think these bureaucrats are all smoking crack, which can be purchased in the next parking lot over, by the way. But crack dealers aren’t their concern, it seems… It’s those darned raw milk families that are ruining Middle America!

Take action: Tell the Missouri Attorney General to keep his hands off raw milk

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster may be a good AG, for all I know. He’s gone after Medicaid fraud, and that earns him some kudos in my book. This whole raw milk thing, if I had to take a guess, is probably some hare-brained idea handed to him by some nutritionally-ignorant staffer who convinced him this could earn him some points for “getting tough on raw milk.” (Is he seriously going to issue a press release announcing a prosecutorial “victory” over two teen girls selling a couple gallons of fresh milk? It’s sort of like prosecuting little kids for running a neighborhood lemonade stand without a business license…)

In any case, it’s worth letting Koster know you think prosecuting these girls for selling raw milk is a complete waste of time and (taxpayer) money. AGs have an important function in protecting consumers from fraud, but in order to be effective, they’ve got to get their priorities straight. Wouldn’t Koster’s time be far better spent suing the drug companies for running fraudulent, misleading television advertisements that exaggerate the benefits of their drugs while glossing over their severe side effects?

Here’s how you can file a consumer complaint against the Missouri Attorney General: Go to http://ago.mo.gov/consumercomplaint.htm to get started.

You can then fill out an online form or you can call 1-800-392-8222 for more information about filing a complaint.

Remember, this AG office is paid by your taxpayer dollars (if you live in Missouri, anyway, and I did for almost 20 years). You have every right to let them know when you think their investigation efforts have gone awry.

Be polite in filing your complaint, but also be firm. Don’t let this Missouri AG get away with prosecuting a small family farm operation for selling fresh milk to willing customers.

The industry assault on raw milk

Actually, reading this last sentence, I can’t even believe America has devolved to the point where such a statement is necessary. Of course raw milk should be legal to sell. After all, grocery stores are full of raw food items such as raw chicken, raw beef and raw fruits and vegetables. Why are state health authorities selectively up in arms over raw milk?

I’ll give you the answer in three words: The Dairy Industry. The dairy industry sees raw milk as competition to its pasteurized, homogenized, standardized, factory-produced “junk” milk product, which promotes heart disease. Raw milk is healthier, more natural and more local than processed milk, and the more consumers learn about raw milk, the less they’ll buy processed milk.

Raw milk is a financial threat to the dairy industry in much the same way that industrial hemp is a threat to the cotton industry (or stevia is a threat to the manufacturer of aspartame). So the dairy industry pressures state and federal bureaucrats to outlaw raw milk and criminalize individuals who dare try to sell it.

This is a protection racket, pure and simple, and it has been conjured up by the dairy industry to protect their profits at the expense of consumer freedom.

Don’t you find it amazing that in the Land of the Free (and the Home of the Brave), that anyone caught buying or selling fresh raw milk is prosecuted as a common criminal? What has America come to if we’re going to start locking up the very same local farmers who provide food security for situations where the long supply chains of just-in-time food delivery break down? If the Missouri lawmakers had any sense at all, they’d be encouraging local production of fresh milk, eggs, grains and other foods to help keep Missouri more self-reliant. But no, fresh milk sellers get arrested and charged with crimes, even while most Missourians drink milk imported from other states!

Missouri’s stance on milk seems a lot like America’s stance on hemp: Criminalize American farmers while importing all the industrial hemp from Canada, where it’s grown legally (and profitably). It is at times like this that you realize agricultural policy in America often seems specifically designed to punish farmers.

I grew up around farmers. I have a tremendous amount of respect for them: For their sweat equity, their hard-won agricultural victories and their seemingly endless financial enslavement to a system of distorted agricultural policies that allows them no escape. Farmers invest their lives in the production of food that most consumers carelessly take for granted. Today, just two percent of the population produces all the food for the other 98 percent — most of whom haven’t a clue where real food comes from.

Real food, it turns out, comes from real farms run by real people. People like the Bechards. And it is these people — these un-celebrated, hard-working, honest American farmers — who should be recognized as the backbone of American prosperity, for without them, we would all go hungry, and even the most specialized, highly-educated scientist would be reduced to a drooling, blabbering infant if all the food disappeared for a mere 96 hours.

And yet, instead of being celebrated, these small family farmers are now being labeled criminals and prosecuted for the “crime” of providing real food to real people. That this is taking place in my home country — indeed, near my home town in Missouri — just breaks my heart.

Never pick a fight with the people who grow your food

It is a sad day indeed for America when tyrant bureaucrats are allowed to run rampant over the family-run farms upon which this great country was originally founded. How quickly America forgets its history… How quickly it abandons those who delivered abundance to us and asked for nothing in return other than a day of sunshine, an occasional rejuvenating rain shower, and a fair price at the market for their hard-won goods.
To the Missouri AG, Chris Koster, you should be ashamed of yourself as both a Missourian and an American for pursuing this prosecution against the Bechard family. It is people like you who are destroying this nation, even as you claim to be saving it.
When you were a young boy in school, and you studied American history and the Civil War, you probably asked yourself, “How could Americans fight each other and kill each other? Who could have started such a conflict?”
The answer, sadly, is people just like you. People who trample the God-given rights of American farmers. People who deny consumers their freedom to buy a nourishing beverage harvested straight off the farm. It is people like you who create the anger and resentment that far too often results in people picking up arms to protect their natural rights that tyrants like you try to steal away from them (under the false pretense of “authority,” no less).
As a Missourian myself, I can tell you that Missouri farmers will not put up with this kind of tyranny for very long. When their livelihoods and their freedoms are clearly threatened by outlandish laws enforced by bureaucratic tyrants who have abandoned all common sense, they will rise up against you, and you will find yourself in a spitting match with a tireless band of rugged Missourians who wrestle with John Deere tractor hydraulics each morning before you even get out of bed.
To you, it’s just a gallon of milk. But to these farmers, it’s their livelihood. Think about that for a minute before you go slapping handcuffs on the very same people who put food on your mama’s table.
– Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Alumni of Raytown High School, Raytown, Missouri, where I was taught how to think for myself by my English composition teacher Mrs. Wagner
P.S. Help support the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund by making a tax-deductible contribution to: http://www.ftcldf.org
(This is one of the key legal defense organizations protecting farmers’ rights to sell raw milk.)
Sources for this story include:

News-Leader:
http://www.news-leader.com/article/…

Missouri AG:

http://ago.mo.gov/

About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health author and technology pioneer with a passion for teaching people how to improve their health He is a prolific writer and has published thousands of articles, interviews, reports and consumer guides, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product or company. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a maker of super bright LED light bulbs that are 1000% more energy efficient than incandescent lights. He also founded an environmentally-friendly online retailer called BetterLifeGoods.com that uses retail profits to help support consumer advocacy programs. He’s also a noted pioneer in the email marketing software industry, having been the first to launch an HTML email newsletter technology that has grown to become a standard in the industry. Adams volunteers his time to serve as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, and regularly pursues cycling, nature photography, Capoeira and Pilates. Known by his callsign, the ‘Health Ranger,’ Adams posts his missions statements, health statistics and health photos at www.HealthRanger.org

Martial Law can be declared under new “Food Safety” bill

HR 2749: “Food Safety” Bill Has Martial Law Provisions by Food Freedom

Sun, Jul 5th, 2009 12:00:00 am

Source: Food Freedom HR 2749 is a strange bill in many ways.

While the other “food safety” bills have been around since winter, allowing for much public discussion on the internet, HR 2749 has only suddenly appeared. It is a mutant conglomeration of the worst of the other bills, with the addition of one very original part – martial law. When it was a draft, it was Waxman’s bill. But once given a number, it became Dingel’s who already had a “food safety” bill, HR 759. So Waxman got none and Dingel got two. (Was this because Waxman, being Jewish, was a hideous choice to introduce a bill with Codex in it – designed by the Nazi pharmaceutical companies that funded Hitler, provided the gas for the gas chambers, experimented on prisoners with vaccines – and is expected to kill millions?) *

HR 2749 would give FDA the power to order a quarantine of a geographic area, including “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.” [This – “that has been used to transport or hold such food” – would mean all cars that have ever brought groceries home or any pickup someone has eaten take-out in, so this means ALL TRANSPORTATION can be shut down under this. This is using food as a cover for martial law.] Under this provision, farmers markets and local food sources could be shut down, even if they are not the source of the contamination. The agency can halt all movement of all food in a geographic area. [This is also a means of total control over the population under the cover of food, and at any time.]

The bill is unusual, too, because slow as it was to appear. The little bugger of bill has made up for it since. It got a number on June 10, went to committee on June 17, passed instantly, and is headed for a vote on the floor of the House. The first Patriot Act was passed using fear of terrorism. This Patriot Act is more coy, hiding under a cloak of “food safety” and but also using fear – fear of food contamination.

Evidently, Americans are supposed to be so frightened by the slightest possibility of a terrorist or of E-coli, they would trade away all their precious, hard fought freedoms for the promise of safety. Or at least, that is what the trade-off has become. “Terrorism” and “contamination” are great bugaboos used to open doors to an end to the US Constitution. That is exactly what we are left with after those who wrote HR 2749 are done. Who did write these bills? It seems Monsanto had not only a hand, but a “defining” influence.http://farmwars.info/?p=594

This redefining of reality is what seems to be underlying all the loss of freedom. Normal and free are disappearing into the maw of corporate definitions of reality. So, we begin with contaminated food from filthy corporate processors and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). And what do we end up with after that reality is ground up by corporate legal hands? Changes in the definition of risk so that natural things are treated as dangerous and toxic things are untouched, such that:

• Healthy, normal farms are taken over by government as though they were run by criminals and contaminated corporate slaughterhouses are untouched;

• The necessary freedom of individuals to live and grow food and be left alone are somehow suddenly destroyed, though they were never the source of any food contamination issue; and such that •

The profit and control and power of corporations which were absolutely the source of the increasingly terrible food, is somehow suddenly vastly increased. Thanks to corporate control over reality, our wanting to clean up corporate processors and feedlots and CAFOS and end up with farmers’ markets and local farms and organic food has become the industrialization and potential destruction of every healthy part of the food system and the triumph of the most contaminated and toxic part. And in the non-bargain, we lost all freedoms and they took all control. And “all” is not a hyperbole here, for one need only look at another provision of HR 2749 to feel how insane, how distant from all we ever wanted.

* HR 2749 would empower FDA to regulate how crops are raised and harvested. It puts the federal government right on the farm, dictating to our farmers. [What is missing in pointing out this astounding control, is that it opens the door to CODEX and WTO “good farming practices” will include the elimination of organic farming by eliminating manure, mandating GMO animal feed, imposing animal drugs, and ordering applications of petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides. Farmers, thus, will be locked not only into the industrialization of once normal and organic farms but into the forced purchase of industry’s products. They will be slaves on the land, doing the work they are ordered to do – against their own best wisdom – and paying out to industry against their will.

There will be no way to be frugal, to grow one’s own grain to feed the animals, to raise healthy animals without GMO grains or drugs, to work with nature at all. Grassfed cattle and poultry and hogs will be finished. So, it needs to be made clear where control will take us. And weren’t these the “rumors on the internet” that were dismissed but are clearly the case?]

When we wanted not to get E-coli in processed meat, did we intend to put our farmers into corporate servitude? Did we plan to have our own lives straight-jacketed by a million new controls over our own gardens, our own desire to grow food, our own plans to start small businesses, our own dreams to have a small piece of land and farm ourselves? Who has the audacity to take our needs and grotesquely bastardize them in these ways, while giving the destruction and totalitarian control the sham name of “food safety”?

We wanted good food. We never wanted to trap our farmers into an industrial prison on their own land, afraid moment to moment of not fulfilling some monstrous set of instructions that never end – rules the farmers loathe, rules that have not only nothing to do with real farming but which are antithetical to it. Why have we ended up with HR 2749, an intense corporate nightmare around the most central and necessary aspects of a free country and of free human beings – farming and food?

American farming needs to be relieved of the burdens it has been under, not finished off by its corporate competition. It needs freedom to flourish again. Obviously – and Congress people who would think to vote for such absurdities, take note – the imposition of surveillance, monitoring, warrantless entry, taking of all records, licensing, fees, Codex and NAIS, in addition to massive penalties and prison terms (all without judicial review over even appropriateness and validity), are not how one thanks American farmers for holding together the only working part of our food system.

See Literal Enslavement by Linn Cohen-Cole. HR 2749 is the most vicious and insane bill one could imagine. Who treats our farmers in this way? Who believes that such police measures can provide for the rebirth of farming and the return of healthy food? Who wrote this bill that trashes the freedom of all our lives? HR 2749 was not what we ordered and it should be sent back the bowels of hell it came from. HR 2749 is both insane and cruel. And the deceptiveness of hiding a Patriot Act in it and the brutal rush to slip it through Congress are ANTI-democratic. Go here to tell Congress, “No.” http://www.ftcldf.org/petitions/pnum993.php