Grassroots in Michigan

34% Say They Or Someone Close To Them Part of Tea Party Movement

Twenty-four percent (24%) of U.S. voters now say they consider themselves a part of the Tea Party movement, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. That’s an eight-point increase from 16% a month ago. …..TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE CLICK HERE

Sights and Sounds of a Lansing Tea Party Video

You’ll have to excuse my brevity here but I am still recovering from a whirlwind and demanding tour schedule as a guest speaker for the Michigan leg of the Tea Party Express. Ten cities and over 500 miles in 4 days! Great turnout in all cities and Bart Stupak resigns…Perfect

Well every picture tells a story doesn’t it? So I’ll let the pictures do that PHOTO ALBUM OF TEA PARTY EXPRESS MICHIGAN TOUR

Just a few pictures of the many uploaded to the album…

Escanaba, MI

Sault Sainte Marie, MI

Cheboygan, MI

Petoskey, MI

Traverse City, MI

Grand Rapids, MI

State Capitol, Lansing, MI

Metro Detroit (Clinton Township, MI)

Besides being a speaker, I will be on the Tea Party Express bus doing a daily blog as well as other social networking activities such as Face Book, (search for “Grassroots in Michigan”) on Twitter as “apackof2″ And MIgrassroots look for the hashtags #mitcot and #TPEXMI hashtags in addition to our Grassroots in Michigan Ning site and our Grassroots in Michigan site

UPDATED Tea Party Express Flier with All MI Cities

Many in the tea party movement are aware of the increasing attempts by liberals (progressives) to try and smear tea party activists or tie the whole movement to a few extremists. We are also aware of the intimidation tactics often used by the left to bully or scare tea party activists or even in some cases use physical violence

We are also well aware that these nefarious attempts are because the leftist are genuinely afraid of the affects the tea party movement has had in countering the socialist/fascist agenda by the current administration as evidence by the Unconstitutional abomination commonly known as the health care bill.

Last night, the tea party group, Grassroots in Michigan experienced a taste of these intimidation tactics at a private meeting held for members

First of all it is important to note that citizens have a right to gather at voluntary members meetings. Grassroots in Michigan is not a government entity, non-profit, 501(c) (3) or (4), or incorporated in any way. Grassroots in Michigan is a true grassroots group consisting of like-minded Michigan citizens and as such we have a right to gather and have simple rules.

One such rule is that we do not allow reporters at our meeting. Never have. The reasons are simple, the meetings are for members to discuss various topics without feeling that are under a microscope or that they may be mis-quoted. We want to foster the exchange of ideas within a safe and private environment, which is our prerogative and right.

However that changed last night, Thursday as a “reporter” from the liberal online blog Michigan Messenger, Todd Heywood attempted to bully his way into our meeting and use” ambush” Style interview tactics on our unwary members as they came to the meeting. Questions such as, “Why won’t she let me in and “What is going on in there!” to members who were unaware of that had been transpiring over a period of several days.

I have had a previous experience with Mr. Heywood hostile and un-factual “reporting” in January when he posted this below. The statements in red are attributed to me by Mr. Heywood when they are in fact made by another. My response is below where I point out that fact.

Michigan tea bag protestors won’t join national protest at Detroit Auto Show
I would post the link buy why give them the hits?

By Todd A. Heywood 1/11/10 10:20 AM
As the Detroit Auto Show gets underway this week, thousands are expected to attend the event, including U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
That announcement lead the national Tea Party movement to call on their supporters to converge on the auto show to protest “Government Motors.” The folks in the movement are opposed to the bailouts which helped the Chrysler and GM move in and out of bankruptcy quickly last year.

But this weekend, Joan Fabiano from the Michigan grass roots tea party and based in the Lansing area, issued a facebook statement saying the national folks could not count on the Michigan “patriots” to join them in Detroit.

In conclusion it is my opinion that this protest is ill-conceived and quite frankly an attempt at attention grabbing grand standing by those outside and unfortunately inside of Michigan.

Fabiano in her statement reminds the national movement that she is a “Christian” and that there are thousands of Christians who had nothing to do with the bail out but work for GM. To this revelation she asks:
Why must some Americans boycott G.M. and throw INNOCENT people, such as myself, out on the street trying to find another job in this economy? Did I do something wrong? Would you like to see yourself out of a job if your company’s leadership made the errors and you had NOTHING to do with it?

There is irony at work here. Fabiano is a retired General Motors employee who would likely have lost a lot had the Obama administration not stepped in to prop up the nation’s largest automaker and guide it through bankruptcy proceedings. And now she’s shocked — shocked! — that anyone would protest such a bailout.

And yet Fabiano herself rants against the government bailout of the banks. At the July 4 tea party at the state Capitol in Lansing she shouted, “We are tired of the out-of-control spending, tired of the socialization of our government, tired of the erosion of our personal liberties.”

She appears in a movie that protests the similar bailouts of banks. Does she not realize that banks have employees too and that failing to help the banks would also have harmed innocent employees of those banks who were not responsible for the behavior of the company’s leadership?

On her own blog, Fabiano regularly inveighs against government bailouts. It just doesn’t seem to apply when a bailout benefits her.

My Responce:

Joanfabiano 2 months ago
In the interest of truth, which appears to be a foreign concept here judging by this post…….the comments attributed to me by this web site are NOT mine, but were left on a public web site as quoted in my letter by another poster, a current GM worker…”Additionally, I believe this comment left by a current GM worker on yet another “national site” speaks volumes to us Michiganders.“Why must some Americans boycott G.M. and throw INNOCENT people, such as myself, out on the street trying to find another job in this economy? Did I do something wrong? Would you like to see yourself out of a job if your company’s leadership made the errors and you had NOTHING to do with it?”

If anyone would bother to actually take a few minutes on my blog, it would become obvious that I favored bankruptcy over a government take over of GM, potentially incurring a loss of income and benefits to myself…But why bother with facts when cherry-picking is easy and fits your agenda?

And first you rail against tea party protests, now you rail when a tea party doesn’t protest..so very fickle! Or perhaps it interferes with your “lock step” theory of the tea party movement

However thanks for the PR for my blog and the new film documentary that your low readership may generate

Joan Fabiano

What had transpired over several days was this:

I had posted our Grassroots in Michigan Meet Up on Face Book

I received a message from Todd Heywood asking for the location stating he intended to come to the meeting. Todd Heywood is not my friend on Facebook, however evidently one of my friends passed who was, passed along the invite to our meeting

I replied to him that we allow do not allow reporters at our meetings.

On Thursday I received a phone call from him and as was just getting ready to step into the shower, I told him to call back. He called back and evidently I missed his call. He left a message stating he WAS coming to our meeting.

Additionally he called the church that we rent for our meetings to confirm the location.

Because of his aggressive stance and that he obviously did not respect our rights, we were rightfully concerned that he may try to force his way in, or cause a disturbance to “create” a story.

In order to protect our members and our right to privacy, we went into a “lock down” mode, locking the front door and manning it with a “beefy” patriot allowing invited members entrance. Mr. Heywood, asked several times, why he was disbarred, knowing full well why and continued to “interview” unwary members coming to our meeting. (See video below) It is important to note also that Mr. Heywood positioned himself in front of the church, which is private property. We could have called the police but we knew this was probably what he wanted, to “create” a scene then report on it.

I suspect Mr. Heywood’s interest in coming to our meeting was because of our invited speaker, Joe Folland, Michigan Director of Oath Keepers

Recently an extremist group in Adrian,Michigan calling themselves “christain” were arrested by the FBI. There have been attempts by the liberal media to connect these extremists to the tea party movement or other lawful militia groups in a organized campaign to smear the whole tea party movement.

Or perhaps it was because Mr. Heywood knew that I was invited on the Michigan leg of the Tea Party Express III “Vote Them Out Tour Or perhaps both.

The bottom line here is that liberals do not respect the privacy and rights of others. That reported attempts to smear, and intimidate tea party groups are a reality and ARE happening.

However as citizen patriots, these attempts are BACKFIRING and only increases our desire to fight for our country, our form of government, a representative Republic and our way to life and have increased the public awareness of these despicable actions.

“I have not yet begun to fight” John Paul Jones
Naval officer of the American Revolutionary War

Why is HJR YY so critically needed?

If enacted into law and formally approved by voters, HJR YY would:

Amend the state Constitution to Create a Federalism Commission bicameral and bipartisan commission
charged with monitoring and reviewing federal laws and mandates to determine if they violate the Michigan Constitution or if they violate such areas as the 9th and 10th Amendments of the US Constitution

The “why” behind HJR YY is two-fold:
Firstly, in cases where the Joint Federalism Commission determines a violation exists, the law will provide for an expedited process for the commission to then push appropriate legislation to nullify to the floor for voting by all members within 10 session days.
The second “why” that makes this legislation necessary is:

Because of the increasing role of so called “Memorandums of Understanding,” “Compacts,” and other agreements between Michigan and other governments, most notably at the federal level.

Most voters are not aware of what a “Memorandum of Understanding” is, or that they can carry the formal force of law.

In many cases such memorandums are created under dubious authority. In other cases, the legislature does vote to grant authority for a memorandum to be entered into, but then what the memorandum actually does often exceeds that authority, or delves into areas that are beyond the scope of the authorizing legislation.

HJR YY has been Referred to Judiciary Committee

IMMEDIATE ACTION TO TAKE:
Call the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee to have HJR YY placed on the calendar for a meeting

Rep. Mark Meadows, (Chair)
Phone: (517) 373-1786Fax: (517) 373-5717
Email markmeadows@house.mi.gov

Request that legislation to put on calendar
BE COURTEOUS WHEN CONTACTING THE OFFICES

We will monitor the Judiciary Committee Calendar when HJR YY is placed on the Committee Calendar to implement the rest of the ACTION PLAN.
CHECK BACK FOR A UPDATE

ACTION PLAN WITH LINK TO HJR YY CAN BE PRINTED OUT AND DOWN-LOADED

ACTION PLAN FOR HJR YY PASSAGE

Timeline of Major Provisions in the Democrats’ Health Care Package

A recent article in the New York Times covered the growth of state-level resistance to a future national health care plan. For example, in 2010, voters in Arizona will have a chance to approve a state constitutional amendment that would effectively ban national health care in that state. Legislators in Florida and Michigan have already introduced similar legislation, and potentially, 15 other states will do so in the 2010 legislative session. But heres something fundamentally important that NYT writer Monica Davey claims in her article:

the Constitutions supremacy clause ordinarily allows federal law to, in essence, trump a state law that conflicts with it

A best, this is a highly-misleading statement.

There are two main points to make here:

1. The supremacy clause does not allow federal law to trump state law in all situations, or even ordinarily as Davey claims. It only does so when both laws are in pursuance of a power that has been delegated to the federal government by We the People. in the Constitution.

2. We know that this is the case because Monicas version of the supremacy clause was actually proposed by leading founders and rejected. When the Constitution was being drafted, James Madison and others proposed what came to be known as the Virginia Plan. A major part of this plan was to give the congress a veto over state laws. It was defeated. That means, in plain English, the founders considered this idea, and said no. And Davey is irrefutably wrong in her claim.

So we know from this short lesson that the supremacy clause did not authorize the power that Davey is claiming. In reality, things are pretty much the other way around. The biggest Constitutional problems that actually exist in this country are those times when the federal government exercises powers not delegated to it by We the People. And that happens far more often than not.

Unfortunately, though, not enough people know this important history of the Virginia Plan, and this basic premise of the Constitution, so they’re easily swayed by patently false statements by people like Davey and the New York

Nullification is a constitutional theory that gives an individual state the right to declare null and void any law passed by the United States Congress which the state deems unacceptable and unconstitutional. The concept is most well-known in the context of the sectionalist crisis that plagued the Union in the 40 years preceding the Civil War.

The origins of nullification are found in the Federalist-Republican debate of the late 1700s. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (1798) declared that the states had the right to nullify laws by which the federal government overstepped its limits of jurisprudence.