Thursday, July 29, 2010

Phil Hart Ethics Hearing (an open letter to Rep Jaquet)

RE: Ethics Committee hearing, Phil Hart
Dear Rep. Jaquet, (An open letter)

I was one of those in attendance for the Phil Hart ethics hearing, and listened intently for the duration of the hearings. My first observation during the hearing was, I actually felt a bit sorry for you. After the reading of the professionally ambiguous “charges” levied by the democrat minority leader, it was fairly obvious you were the one who had to defend these baseless accusations. The leader put you in a bad spot, and I hope you will let him know; for your own sake.

Although this hearing should have never taken place, the facts came out and the charges against Rep. Hart were soundly put down on all accounts; that was probably a good thing overall. However, the reason I write to you today is in regards to the tack you took once the facts and evidence made your position, a loser. I was shocked to hear that you were willing to vote to reprimand Mr. Hart, not based upon fact, but based upon “public perception.” As a side note Rep. Jaquet, you did not even provide a reference or supporting evidence to substantiate a negative public perception, so at best it is implied public perception; a weak case indeed. Furthermore, public perception may or may not be based upon facts, and most likely will be corrupted by prejudices. More often than not “perception” is formed by little snippets from the media. If implied perception be the essence of justice should we not just skip the legislature and the courts and just let those who generate perceptions (the owners of the newspapers, websites and TV stations), rule in all affairs? The point of this hearing was not to imply perception, or deliver an informal referendum from your constituents, but seek the truth and marry it up to the law; that is justice.

I was also troubled to hear the other two members of the democrat party on the panel parrot your sentiment (Rep. George Sayler Dist. 4 and William Killen Dist. 17). Rep Sayler even flatly stated, “Perception is reality.” Wow! Perhaps this is a “teachable moment” for the public. Perhaps the difference between the (D) and the (R) are manifest in this principal. Does a democrat believe that public perception should rule as law even if it is unjust? I know the essence of republicanism is the exact opposite. Its credo is one of written law, above any one man or group of men; one which holds in check the tyrant and the lynch mob alike.

Finally, I find your preference to perception over truth, inconsistent with a member of an ethics committee. I find no place for feelings or implied perceptions, in such a privileged position; the truth is all that matters. Had you your way, a great injustice would have taken place today to one of Idaho’s brightest sons. In light of that I would ask you resign your position on the committee.

Walt Holton
Caldwell, Idaho

Thursday, July 15, 2010


Below is a letter I composed, intended for our State reps and senators; a plea for them to read the EXELLENT book "Nullification". My Barnabas, told me it was too long so I wrote another very short version, and sent it to them. I left this attachment in the letter just in case I did not make the sale with brevity.

Dear Representative,

I humbly beg your attention on a matter of the utmost importance; the preservation of the Union of the United States.

It is no secret there is much discord amongst the people these days. I assert that much of this general sentiment is a deliberate attempt by despots to sew the seeds of dissent, and who wish to install a different Order over man. . Regardless of intent or lack thereof, we, as a nation, are nonetheless eroding into a centralized government with the power far out of reach of the people and the States that formed the Union. Despite the fact that central powers, either in a Nation or Religion, have spawned the greatest inhumanities of the histories, such a great and powerful behemoth is not what is described in our founding documents; The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution and Bill of Rights. I fear as we continue down this road of despair and hopelessness, small insurrections will come to pass, as desperate men, out of options and hope, attempt in vain to throw off the chains of legal injustice. I PRAY this day does not come! I am quite certain, however, that when God answers our petitions, he does not manifest his power through a lightning bolt, but rather through the hearts and minds of Man. Considering that observation and before you consider my request, I humbly ask you to consider this verse:

James 1:5-6 (NIV) 5If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. 6But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind.

My personal definition of “wisdom” is: The ability to disseminate the Truth. The Truth exists in every aspect of matter, energy and awareness (life); finding the Truth is wisdom.

I submit “based upon the Truth” being an objective term, that there is a Truth concerning the meaning and intent of the Constitution of the [u]nited States of America. This intent is not reserved for the sage or barrister but rather in plain sight for all to discover. The literal intent of our founders is no secret, as they flatly and simply expounded so many times, and as they eloquently bloviated for volumes to satisfy the wordsmiths and tyrants in waiting who sought to morph its meaning even in their time. The Constitution was for the common man.

The Constitution is a contract/compact between the States to form a general government with very specific enumerated powers. The enumeration of these powers was done specifically and clearly to act as a final limit to the power and reach of the general government; all other powers and rights are reserved for the “States, or the People.” The very specificity of these enumerated powers is the first evidence to a logical mind that the ambiguous redefinition of certain terms within the Constitution such as “regulate” (Commerce Clause) and “General Welfare”, are nothing more than an attempt to usurp and redirect the power this document carries to a despot or tyrant. One note of utmost importance is the fact that the States voluntarily formed the Union, and that a State by 18th century definition means nation; sovereign in all intents and purposes, and the Union was meant to serve the common interests of the States and not to be their master. As evidenced by many of the founder’s writings, their greatest fear was the created ‘being’ or entity (the general government) would live on its own and seek to destroy its master; to use my own analogy like Frankenstein’s monster killing his master.

For the sake of brevity and courtesy for your time I will make an assumption that you will likely agree with and then make my final plea for investigative action and intellectual investment on your part. My assumption is that the general government (National, Federal or whatever you wish to call it), has on countless occasions stepped outside its prescribed limits, by the establishment of laws, resolutions, treaties, administrations and so forth. For whatever the intent of the unconstitutional laws, either holy or unholy, this usurpation of authority has largely been unchecked, and metastasized into an unsustainable gauntlet of regulation and granted privilege. I could go on but such a rant would be redundant with undeniable evidence at every turn of the head. Perhaps this is death by a thousand paper cuts, but death nonetheless.

We are taught that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter for a dispute of constitutionality of an action of the Federal Government that harms a State or a person in the State. Any reasonable mind would immediately see the obvious and absurd conflict of interest this form of dispute resolution offers since the Supreme Court is a part of the Federal Government. Although we are taught they are a non-political entity of Sages, the simplest mind should see through such a fa├žade simply by watching a confirmation hearing. The Kagan confirmation hearings show there need not be a more grotesque comedy to make the case in point. So if the Supreme Court is not supreme, then who is??? Did the founders leave us at an impasse in justice? Was a virus imbedded in our form of government? Absolutely not! The power belongs to the States; the creator of the agency that is the US government. I do not make this claim out of arbitrary whim but based upon the utmost orthodox sources fathomable; the writings AND actions of the very architects of this nation…Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They foresaw such an impasse in justice and wrote quite clearly about it. Their solution; Nullification, as it was later called was the summation of “The Principals of ‘98”, and the summary word for the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. I beg of you to NOT simply Google these resolutions and read the modern day nationalistic commentary. I ask you to invest in some critical knowledge. I ask you to buy the book Nullification; How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century”, by best selling author Thomas Woods. Please note, I have neither affiliation nor investment in any kind to Dr. Woods. My investment is in America only, and she will profit from my request.

So what does this mean to you Mr./Mrs. Representative? It means YOU are the kingpin that will hold fast or rust and break. It means you are not only a keeper of municipal things but the keeper of the Union. It means you are our agent of protection against Federal tyranny. It means you are to thank for the preservation of the Union and the protection of our Liberty; or to be damned for their loss. I remind you that ignorance is no excuse for an intellectually capable person, but rather an indictment of character.

Walt Holton

Friday, July 2, 2010

Statism and Emissions (An open letter to Governor Otter)

Dear Governor Otter (an open letter),

I have voted for you in every general election since I was old enough to vote. Years, ago my vote was based simply upon the fact that Republicans, on the whole, typically stand for the principals of individual liberty and responsibility more so than the Democrats; I really did not know much about you beyond that. Since then I have put on a couple decades of knowledge and wisdom, and I must say that I am a bit confused, concerning your actions and inactions.

Back when you were a congressman you wrote a forward to a pamphlet by Ezra Taft Benson, “The Proper Role of Government.” I read this pamphlet for the first time several months ago and I was a bit surprised, after reading the very eloquent direct and liberty minded, that it was written by you. I would encourage you to go back and re-read your fine words, as well as the co-forward by Professor John T. Wenders (world renown University of Idaho economics professor), who I was fortunate enough to study under. I ask you to do this with hopes you will rediscover your once apparent, spirit of Jefferson and Madison. In this rediscovery I hope you will stand, and use your Constitutional power as Governor, and resist every attempt by the National government to dissolve our borders both as a state and nation. I ask you to stand and lead the good people of Idaho, rejecting every assault, no matter how small or apparently benevolent, to the Constitution and 10th Amendment particularly. I know you are a good man, worthy of the power entrusted to you, now it is time to wield that power against the statists in DC. Was the reason you were born and given your blessings of office, to simply manage highway funding, or was it to help save America?

Pep talk aside, I would like you to consider throwing your weight around on a “small” issue with big implications to our states lower and middle class counties. A few months back Canyon County was forced (kicking and screaming) to comply with emissions testing on cars and trucks. Was it a coincidence this mandate happened during the worst economy of our lives? I would like you to consider the wealth represented in real dollars (as real as a paper dollar is anyway) that is being taken from our citizens not just in the fees to comply with the testing but in lost productivity, loss of other scarce funds, and loss in asset value.

Keeping a long topic relatively short, each person and business must take time from business or leisure and spend it complying with this regulation; this is a loss to the economy; subjective but tangible. Also consider the thousands of cars that do not pass, these ridiculous standards, either due to a particulate count or a check engine light (automatic fail). Each one of these un-needed repairs, usually no less than $200 and often $1000, is an assault on the very scarce funds available. What’s more, most of the cost of repairs goes directly to Detroit or where ever the parts are manufactured…money leaving the state! Another “unintended consequence” to this statist law is the evaporation of “real” wealth represented in the value of the thousands and thousands of cars valued under $2000. Consider many of these older modern cars have ECM’s engine control modules, in other words a computer an old computer. These computers malfunction and send error messages for stupid reasons; most owners of older cars simply live with the light on because you would be in the mechanic every week. Now consider if you have a check engine light on, and you wish to trade your car in, and the dealer knows it can not be licensed with that light on, and it will likely cost $1000 to fix it. Will they reduce the trade in value? They must. This scenario represents hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in evaporated asset value in Canyon County alone. What will the National government do to remedy this? Likely another “Cash for Clunkers” program, one funded by the next generation; funded by those too young to vote. In this scenario again, money is leaving the state, due to a mandate from the National government, enriching the union companies in Detroit. I am convinced this is not by accident.

One could also apply the same thinking to many other National government mandated laws, like lead based paint certification, air conditioning refrigerant mandates and on and on. I ask you Butch to fight the small fight as well as the big ones. Every mandate is a liberty lost, and every mandate by the National government outside of their seventeen Constitutional powers, our republic of federated states fades.

Walt Holton