First, the Constitution party already exists. Check it out.
Second, what we need is a Washington, not a Jefferson. (nothing against Jefferson) Washington didn't want to be President. He reluctantly agreed and then promised he would only serve for two terms. Glenn's right. He's out there somewhere. The way we find him is by supporting principled candidates in your local, state, and congressional elections. If we all did that and we elected 468 (435 in the House and 33 in the Senate) new congressman and senators in 2010 we would naturally find a couple who were ready to rise to the challenge.

It's so hard to find a Jefferson or Washington on the "Bloggesphere". We are like a bunch of craps in a bucket. Someone tries to climb out and the rest of us pull them back in. Everyone is SO skeptical and they are right to be. Just because some guy on a website says he is principled and wants to run for office doesn't mean they are deserving of our support. If we are going to find a Jefferson he (or she) will have to distinguish himself in more ways than blogging.

I also truly believe he is out there. Maybe we know him already (Ron Paul), maybe we don't (guy next door). I know that when we find him I will follow. In his absence, I'll work as hard as I can to re-establish our nation to it's Constitutional roots.

marchforliberty.org

Why not both? Tea parties are being organized all over the nation on 4/15 including D.C. I don't think there is enough time to coordinate everything that is needed for a huge march in the next two weeks but I completely support those who are working hard to make it happen. I have put my efforts (and every spare second I've had for the last 3 months) behind the March in D.C. on July 4th. I bought my plane ticket 3 weeks ago. I'm committed. We all have to commit at some point. When will you commit?

marchforliberty.org

You know, that's how we got in this mess in the first place.

Imagine you and your wife are walking through the hardware store and you both see a new refrigerator on sale. You've been needing a new fridge and this one is a really good one for a great price but it's a one-day-only sale. You look at your wife and say, "Wow, lets get it! We really need a new fridge." She says, "Yes we do but we really don't have the money right now. We have the house payment due and we're trying to save for retirement." You argue, "But this is a really good deal and it's only for today!" She responds, "It doesn't matter how good a deal it is if WE DON"T HAVE THE MONEY!"

Our government has been doing the same thing for decades. It doesn't matter how great the program is or how much good it will do. If we don't have the money, YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT!

There are only two questions that should be asked before any legislation is introduced. Is it constitutional? Can we afford it? If the answers to those questions are "YES", then we can debate about whether it's a good idea, whether there are better alternatives, and are other things of a higher priority.

Constitutionality and Affordability.

Everyone else understands those concepts (although they have a tough time on the second one sometimes - see credit cards and subprime mortgages). Why can't Washington?

marchforliberty.org

I've been considering it. I wrote an email to Senator McCain (I'm from Arizona) telling him if he voted for the unconstitutional bailout I would personally run against him. I don't even care if I win as long as I expose him for the wolf in sheep's clothing that he is. What I would really like is for Congressman Trent Franks to run for McCain's seat so I could run for Franks' congressional seat.

People have the wrong idea about campaign contributions. There is nothing wrong with supporting principled candidates with your money. The way it's supposed to work is that a business sees a candidate that is for less government and lower taxes. The business realizes that if people had more money in their own pockets there would be more money to spend on their products. Thus they donate money to support the candidate and everybody wins.

Unfortunately, that is not how it has worked for a while. Now it is a "Quid pro quo" arrangement. You give them money and they will support your interests and steer taxpayer funds in your direction. Back in the good old days they called that bribery. You could go to jail for that. Now, that's "politics as usual."

I will gladly accept campaign contributions but people will know exactly what they will be getting for their money. If it isn't in the Constitution, I WILL NOT vote for it. Even if it is in the Constitution, if we don't have the money, I WILL NOT vote for it.

Thomas Jefferson stated in the Declaration of Independence that when a government becomes oppressive "it is our right, it is our duty" to either alter or abolish it. I am trying to "alter" it by whatever peaceful means necessary. If that effort proves unsuccessful, there's always door number 2.

We can't argue the way the left and right have argued for decades. No one wins those arguments and no listens anymore anyway. We need to focus on the Constitution. First, they can't win an argument against the Constitution. Second, even if they try to win that argument, it will expose them as the anti-American socialists that they are. Either way, we win! They lose the argument and the public sees the man behind the curtain.

The worst part of the last Presidential Election was watching the debates. I just screamed at McCain to ask two questions all night long. Anytime Obama said anything his answer should have been "How are we going to pay for that and where can I find that in the Constitution?" EVERY SINGLE TIME! Obama would have crapped his pants and America would have seen the truth. Of course, McCain didn't do that because he had no intention of following the Constitution either!

Political party is irrelevant. The rule of law is all that matters. Does the Constitution allow it? If yes, then lets debate it. If no, the debate is over.

marchforliberty.org

The president can't tie his shoes without the permission of Congress. He must have a willing accomplice. He currently has that accomplice in the form of a Democratically controlled House and Senate. If you want to stop Obama NOW you should have canvased your neighborhoods back in November. If you want to stop him as soon as possible, start to canvas your neighborhood in support of new representatives to the House and Senate in 2010.

Be a part of this effort in Washington D.C. on July 4th.

marchforliberty.org

If you want to dump something of value into the bay feel free. May I suggest U.S. dollars but you better hurry. They may not have value for long.

Or you could use those dollars to buy a plane ticket to D.C. on July 4th. Come organize a movement with us. Be a part of the process that will restore our republic. We will take back America congressional district by congressional district. It has already begun. We take a giant leap forward on July 4th in Washington D.C. at the Capitol Building.

See you in D.C.!

marchforliberty.org

I understand completely. The economy hasn't hit me yet so I'll count myself lucky. If things keep going the way they are, we'll all end up in the same mess eventually.

If you can't make it to D.C. go to reteaparty.com and find an event closer to home. There will be an event in all the State capitals and most major cities. July 4th is a Saturday. Is your country worth a tank of gas and a few hours of your free time? Find an event and get involved.

marchforliberty.org

Glenn has not limited anything. The Texas tea parties can do whatever they want. All Glenn said was that if it turns out to be a Bash Obama rally he won't have anything to do with it. Did he say they couldn't protest? Did he say they couldn't have signs? Did he say they couldn't bash whoever they wanted? No. He simply said what he was looking for and if he couldn't find it in the two Texas events, he'd look elsewhere.

Last time I checked, this is still a FREE COUNTRY! People can do whatever they want. they can protest when and where they want. Even super-popular, movement-starting, website-creating radio and TV talk show hosts are free to choose as well. He didn't say you couldn't bash Obama, Pelosi, Bush, McCain, or the Easter Bunny. He simply stated what he hoped would happen and that if something other than his hopes happened he wouldn't attend.

How does that limit free speech? Are you still able to say what you want? Of course. If you will excuse the accusation, you have been watching the liberal playbook in action a little too long. You are starting to use their tactics. Me speaking my mind DOES NOT limit your ability to speak yours. When two points of view are expressed, one does not cancel out the other. The liberal politically correct crowd have been feeding us this garbage for years. "Free speech is protected as long as it's our free speech. If it's not our free speech, then it's hate-speech and will not be tolerated."

We have to stand up for the rights granted us by our Creator protected by the Constitution. They are NOT your rights alone, neither are they mine. They are OUR rights. You must fight not only for your right to freedom, but Glenn Beck's as well. You must fight for Barack Obama's rights. You must fight for a murderer's right to a fair trial. You must fight for AIG's right to collect the bonuses contractually promised them

YOU MUST FIGHT FOR THE LAW. THE LAW OF THE LAND ESTABLISHED BY OUR CONSTITUTION!

Glenn Beck has the right to say what he wants, when he wants. So do you. Do not accuse him of censorship while he exercises his rights.