A Newly Re-written Buffer Zone Law – Really?

July 23, 2014 in 1st Amendment, Founding Principles, Political Overreach

Mark Fishe 2014


Auburn, MA     July 23, 2014   Contact: Andrew Skoog     Phone: 800 863 5737

Email: thespiritcontinues@markfisher2014.com


For immediate Release:

A Newly Re-written Buffer Zone Law – Really?

Mark Fisher, Republican Candidate for Governor of MA comments on toady’s proceedings at the State House in Boston:

Today, the House of Representatives is discussing a new Buffer Zone Law. The recent Supreme Court, unanimous 9-0 decision against the MA buffer zone law showed that Liberals and Conservatives on the bench can come together and agree on this issue. This decision should be hailed by both Pro-Life and Pro-choice groups because it allows women greater opportunity to receive added information on which to make informed choices. Those who oppose this decision show their true colors as being Pro-Abortion and not Pro-Choice!

In the course of the arguments for this case it was asked if there was evidence of violence outside of abortion clinics. No such evidence could be produced. This is surprising in two ways. First, the pro-abortion crowd talks constantly about such violence. Second, even though looking like branches of the NSA with all their surveillance cameras, Abortion clinics were not able to document any violence by Pro-Life counselors. This is because violence done to women at these clinics is performed on the inside of them, not on the streets outside of them. The recent, horrifying story of Dr. Kermit Gosnell proves this only too well. But, this story did not receive the coverage it deserved. If it had, the truth about the violence against women at abortion clinics would have been told, and this is the first step in preventing it.

Mark Fisher has received the endorsement of Mass Citizens for Life (MCFL). He agrees with MCFL president Anne Fox in her statements: “Massachusetts Citizens for Life urges the legislature to let law enforcement apply existing laws before writing any new ones.” “Let’s not waste the time of the legislators and the tax money of the citizens to end up before the Supreme Court again.”


For more information about Mark Fisher for Governor, visit www.markfisher2014.com




Massachusetts Family Fights To Gain Control Of Daughter’s Medical Care – Parents Worst Nightmare

February 23, 2014 in "Bill of Rights", Children, Constitution, Founding Principles, Freedom, Nanny State, Progressivism, Socialism

Boston Children HospitalFamily Fights To Gain Control Of Daughter’s Medical Care – America’s News HQ
Massachusetts Court Takes Custody Away From Parents & Put A Gag Order On Parents! “Nuts”
Fighting For His Daughter
Attack On Parental Rights
Wake The Hell Up America

The Department of Children and Families (DCF) Has File Contempt Charges Against The Father For Going Public & Fighting For His Daughter Life – Is This America!

Father Speaks Out On Losing Custody Of Daughter Over Medical Issues – Parents Worst Nightmare

**Please Click Below to SUBSCRIBE for More “Mass Tea Party” Videos:

It’s Come Down to Hand to Hand Fighting for our Constitutional Republic and our Liberty

October 17, 2013 in Abuse of Power, Accountability, America's Collapse, Constitution, DICTATORSHIP, Founding Principles, Liberty, Liberty in Jeopardy, Obama's America 2016, Our Dear Leader, Police State, Political Class, Political Deception, President Obama, Progressivism, Restoring Courage, The Hope and The Change, The Stakes for the 2014 Election

In his recent book, The Liberty Amendments, Mark Levin has provided us with a Constitutional path provided by our forefathers who foresaw a time when”-the Federal Government might breach the Constitution’s limit and begin oppressing the people.”

A path that can restore our Constitutional Republic and wrestle it away from our present “Functional Dictatorship” which continues to tighten its noose around our Liberties while our dysfunctional, elitist “Establishment Political Class” that permeates the Washington beltway, stands by catatonically.

The plan is to use our Constitution’s Article V Amendment process that states that upon the application of 2/3 of our state legislatures,   a Convention shall be convened  for the propose of   proposing Amendments to  our Constitution.

 In the Liberty Amendments, Mark Levine provides some of his ideas for Amendments, but realizes that others may wish to add or subtract from his proposals as and he is fine with that.

 So if we are to succeed we must begin to act immediately and move towards a 2/3 Majority of all state legislators. It will not happen overnight but we must be vigilant and patient if we are to succeed. We are in a war for survival and in war, as we have learned from the Progressive leaders our “Dear Leader” , Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and their allies, they take no prisoners.   

Our adversaries now know and understand that they must forcibly block this  last route to our freedom at all costs, if they are to “fundamentally Transform” America away from our Constitutional Republic and its tenants that guarantee our “…certain unalienable Rights” of “…Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness –“

The following excerpt  is from Mark Levin’s  book The Liberty Amendments:

“For a century, the Statists have steadfastly constructed a federal Leviathan, distorting and evading our constitutional system in pursuit of an all-powerful, ubiquitous central government. The result is an ongoing and growing assault on individual liberty, state sovereignty, and the social compact. Levin argues that if we cherish our American heritage, it is time to embrace a constitutional revival.

The delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and the delegates to each state’s ratification convention foresaw a time when—despite their best efforts to forestall it—the Federal government might breach the Constitution’s limits and begin oppressing the people. Agencies such as the IRS and EPA and programs such as Obamacare demonstrate that the Framers’ fear was prescient. Therefore, the Framers provided two methods for amending the Constitution. The second was intended for our current circumstances—empowering the states to bypass Congress and call a convention for the purpose of amending the Constitution. Levin argues that we, the people, can avoid a perilous outcome by seeking recourse, using the method called for in the Constitution itself.

The Framers adopted ten constitutional amendments, called the Bill of Rights, that would preserve individual rights and state authority. Levin lays forth eleven specific prescriptions for restoring our founding principles, ones that are consistent with the Framers’ design. His proposals—such as term limits for members of Congress and Supreme Court justices and limits on federal taxing and spending—are pure common sense, ideas shared by many. They draw on the wisdom of the Founding Fathers—including James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and numerous lesser-known but crucially important men—in their content and in the method for applying them to the current state of the nation.

Now is the time for the American people to take the first step toward reclaiming what belongs to them. The task is daunting, but it is imperative if we are to be truly free.”

Don’t Allow Colorado’s Blatantly Unconstitutional Gun Laws to Become a Harbinger for MA

March 5, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, Constitutional, Deval Patrick, Founding Principles, Freedom, Generational Theft, Liberty, Liberty in Jeopardy, MA, Obamanation, Political Deception, Political Incompetence, President Obama, United States Constitution, US Sovereignty

Judge NapolitanoOUR Declaration of Independence states that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:

Consequently, one  can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights. They are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances be surrendered or taken.  All individual’s have unalienable rights.

Our Second Amendment states: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

There are today, people in our country,  who are attempting to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms and would thereby place our personal safety, our family’s safety  and our country’s safety in jeopardy of being overrun by criminality and anarchists.  However, our forefathers understood that our right to bear arms is  so basic and intrinsic a right that not even Government can not eradicate it.  Consequently, we have  an obligation to future generations to guard this right jealously from Federal encroachment by Barack Hussein Obama and State encroachment by Deval Patrick and his minions in our Legislature.

The following are but a few of the multitude of writings by our forefathers regarding this subject:

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. …Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.–Thomas Jefferson, quoting with approval a noted criminologist of his day.

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

“…to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380) 

Today Megan Kelly talked to Judge Andrew Napolitano about Colorado’s blatantly unconstitutional gun law proposals:

Megan Kelly:  Colorado is becoming a hot spot in the fight over second Amendment Rights today after a legislative committee approves a controversial bill that would make weapons manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes committed with their guns.

This legislation would become one of the most dramatic gun laws in the country and is polarizing the state. The lawmakers in Colorado believe that they have the votes. And what they are trying to do is impose criminal liability or civil liability?

Judge Andrew Napolitano:  Civil liability for the manufacturer or the re-seller if the gun is used to commit a crime .

Megan Kelly:  So  if I have I’m in a gun shop business  and  I got a gun shop and I sell someone a gun and they use it and kill somebody, I could  potentially get sued as the gun shop owner?

Judge Andrew Napolitano:  Yes, as is could the manufacturer from whom you bought the gun.  And if the person to whom you sold it sells it to another person, then the person to whom you sold it could be liable for the criminal behavior of the ultimate user. That’s why you heard in one of the clips you just ran, police saying, police testifying at this hearing; this is un- enforceable. You can’t possibly impose a burden on on-d the third person down the line.

Megan Kelly:  How far down the line can you go?

Judge Andrew Napolitano:  Think about it. Can we , we hold General Motors liable because an automobile kills someone even if its used recklessly, even if it’s used criminally? Of course not! We just don’t do that in America. This transference of liability is basically wrong and unfair.







Federal Government Discriminates and Intimidates in the Name of Diversity

February 22, 2013 in Abuse of Power, Anarchy, Founding Principles, Indoctrination, Liberty in Jeopardy, Political Deception, President Obama, Progressivism, Who Is Barack Hussein Obama?

Blaming AmericaThe Barack Hussein O’Bama (a.ka. Barry)  Administration has been secretly using our tax treasure to fund a racist, bigoted militant war against our government agencies. Obama is using the tactics that he fine tuned  as a Chicago “Organizer” in an attempt to  brow beat and intimidate government workers into advocating  his far left propaganda and revisionist history.  These mandatory brainwashing sessions  have been carried out in the Agriculture, Defense and numerous other Departments under the guise of  Diversity while in actuality it ‘s clandestine purpose  was and is uniformity.

Bill O’Reilly:  “Dr. Samuel Betances used his paid opposition to demean the United States and to indoctrinate his captive audience.”

“Talking Points believes the reason stuff like this goes on is the culture of liberalism that is now gripped Washington with a liberal president and senate the message is gone out progressive thought Is in.

And you know what that’s fine If it’s simply expression, but once the taxpayer gets charged for the propaganda that’s malfeasance that’s a misappropriation of taxpayer dollars.”

Bill O’Reilly is correct on his points about “…the propaganda that’s malfeasance that’s a misappropriation of taxpayer dollars.” and we as Americans have a Right and Obligation to follow-up on these charges and to insure that they cease and desist. This is after all America and not Soviet Russia during the “Cold War”.  Our forefathers, fathers, uncles and cousins shed their blood to inure the freedom and  liberty of our nation.  As the torchbearers of this generation, we must insure that this type of propaganda  and intimidation is rooted out at its core.

Call the White House, your Senators, Representatives and tell them that they are our servants and that they need to heed our admonition our face the political consequences.

2nd Amendment Opponent Mayor Bloomberg’s Armed Security Accosts Journalist

January 29, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", 2nd Amendment, Abuse of Power, Anarchy, Constitutional, Founding Principles, Gun Control, Political Class, Political Deception

Our country has now evolved such that there are one set of rules for our new elite “Ruling Political Class” and another for us, the  new common “Serfs Class”.

Our Political Class has become a do as I say not as I do elite.  Rabid anti-gun Anti-2nd Amendment Mayor Michael Bloomberg surrounded by 5 hefty security guards , leaving a conference, is asked a gun control question by a reporter,  Jason Matter, who was also an attendee. Jason is immediately accosted by Bloomberg’s  guards  and then the guards  continue to harass and intimidate him even after he walks away down the street.





By:  John Haywood
1/28/2013 12:55 PM

My old friend Jason Mattera, now with the Andrea Tantaros show, participated in a stress test of New York mayor Michael Bloomberg’s journalist repellent systems, and I’m pleased to report that the system is functioning beautifully.  The Mayor is protected from a number of things he would prefer his citizens remain vulnerable to, including impertinent questions.  He doesn’t seem any more eager to declare his own personal “gun-free zone” than most other gun control zealots, but he’s strongly in favor of journalism-free zones:

You can tell Jason is mellowing out, because in his wild youth he would have done the interview with a Big Gulp in his hand.  If he gets a chance to conduct a follow-up interview, I’m hoping he’ll ask if Bloomberg has ever participated in Barack Obama’s “frequent skeet shoots,” which I believe look something like this:

It’s remarkable how reliably the “why won’t you disarm your bodyguards?” question discombobulates the anti-Second Amendment crowd.  They really don’t have a comfortable focus-group-friendly answer to it.  The coldly logical responses – “because I’m more important than you, so I need protection” – simply do not sit well with the public.  That includes people who might otherwise be content to ride in the gun-control bandwagon, until they hit this particular intellectual speed bump.

The question is not, “Why should you have a professional security detail while I must defend myself?”  If that were the issue at hand, it wouldn’t be tough to answer the question.  Instead, the ruling class finds it difficult to explain why they should enjoy armed protection while the rest of us are forbidden to defend ourselves at all, or must do so within an environment of complex restrictions that put us at a pronounced disadvantage against attackers.  This position might be easier to defend if the Little People faced no significant risk of criminal attack, but that’s obviously not the case.  It’s especially obvious if you know more about the recent history of law-abiding citizens defending themselves with firearms than the national media wants you to know.

Serious students of American liberty read the Second Amendment and see the right of individual citizens to defend themselves, and their families, against tyranny and barbarism.  It is increasingly offensive to hear people with armed security details lecture us on how it’s really more like a provisional license to shoot ducks and clay pigeons.

Update: You’ll have to make do with the artistic representation of Obama’s frequent skeet shooting sessions provided by Messrs. Brooks and Korman, because the White House refuses to provide photos of our gun-slinging President filling the sky with hot lead.


Read the entire post and comments here: http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/28/good-news-mayor-bloombergs-journalist-repellent-system-is-working-perfectly/


Your Right To Bear Arms – Defending The Constitution – Judge Andrew Napolitano Vs New York Times

January 15, 2013 in "Bill of Rights", 2nd Amendment, Election, Founding Principles, Freedom, Gun Control, Hope and Change, Obama's America 2016, Obamanation, President Obama, Socialism, United States Constitution

Judge2nd Amendment Was Not Written To Protect The Rights Of Hunters !

2nd Amendment Was Written to Protect Against a “Tyrannous Government” & Self Defense”

Founders Wanted To Guarantee Protection!

New York Times Takes On Judge Andrew Napolitano For Defending The Constitution

White House Prepares 19 Executive Orders

Your Right To Bear Arms – Defending The Constitution – Judge Andrew Napolitano Vs New York Times

Obama vows to ‘vigorously pursue’ gun control, prepares to release proposals
Published January 15, 2013 FoxNews.com

President Obama says he plans to make public later this week the  details of his plan to tighten firearms laws based on the findings of a  White House task force he commissioned in the aftermath of the fatal Connecticut  school shooting.

The task force was led by Vice President Joe Biden and held its final White  House meeting Monday, talking with members of the House Democratic Gun Violence  Prevention Task Force.

A source told Fox News that Biden explained at the meeting that he and his  staff have researched various plans of action to reduce and prevent gun violence  and have identified 19 different options the president could choose to implement  through executive order.

Obama said Monday he planned to review the findings and will “vigorously  pursue” the recommendations in the next few days. It’s unclear how many of the  19 options the president would eventually take up.

The president vowed after the Dec. 14 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary  School in Newtown, Conn., that he would look for ways to curb gun violence,  including possible legislation to ban assault weapons and high-capacity  ammunition clips like those used in the attack, which killed 20 first-graders  and six adults at the school.

Among the other potential proposals is tightening background checks on  prospective gun buyers. The president said Monday some of his goals could be  accomplished through legislation, while others could be done through executive  action.

The White House meeting Monday included Attorney General Eric Holder,  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Health and Human Services  Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who have participated in several other talks.

“Our task force looks forward to working with … the Obama administration  and all stakeholders to enact a comprehensive set of proposals that  both respects the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens without a history  of dangerous mental illness and helps keep our schools, streets and communities  safe from gun violence,” said California Rep. Mike Thompson, chairman of the  eight-member House task force.

Biden already has talked with individuals and groups supporting tougher guns  laws, including the Brady Campaign, and gun rights groups, including the  National Rifle Association, which opposes any legislation to again ban assault  weapons and high-capacity clips. Biden also has spoken with governors and  executives with the video-gaming industry.

Obama has suggested he will submit legislation after his Jan. 21 inauguration  and Congress’ return to Washington.

Read more:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/14/obama-plans-to-release-this-week-details-his-proposed-gun-legislation/#ixzz2I38kJL1c

What does a Georgia Mom and Pravda have in Common?

January 10, 2013 in "Biden the Fool", 2nd Amendment, Founding Principles, Freedom, President Obama, Putin, United States Constitution

“the Socialist” Barack Hussein Obama,  “Biden the Fool” and the Progressive Left want to remove  our 2nd Amendment Constitutional Right to bear arms. What would have been the consequences if this GA mother of twins, wasn’t armed when  a Home Invader broke into her home, went upstairs to her bedroom and opened the door to  a crawl space where she was hiding clutching her children? The following video contains excerpts from a the 911 cal


The following article is from the Blaze:



Dec. 31, 2012 3:45pm Erica Ritz

US-SHOOTING-GUNS-BUYBACK An LAPD officer stands before collected assault weapons during the LAPD Gun Buyback Program event in the Van  Nuys area of north Los Angeles, on December 26, 2012. Credit: AFP/Getty Images

Back in November, the Russian news outlet Pravda (formerly the official press of the USSR), surprised everyone when it published a scathing opinion column labeling President Obama a “Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so.”

And they appear to have done it again, this time weighing on in the gun control debate currently gripping the United States.

Written by Stanislav Mishin, the opinion piece, titled “Americans, never give up your guns,” begins:

These days, there are few few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to [bear] arms and use deadly force to defend one’s self and possessions.

Mishin has rocked the boat before, writing in 2009 about American capitalism being “gone with a whimper.”  Like the current article, it was originally published on the author’s personal blog before being picked up by Pravda.

By and large, he uses Russian history as a warning for what could occur in a worst-case scenario:

One of the first things [the Soviets] did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much [to worry about] for soldiers.

Mishin also reminds that retired military officers and other armed citizens were initially promised that if they stayed out of the way, they would be left alone.  When they objected, many citizens were asked to “register their weapons” and were “promptly shot.”

The article continues to examine the continuing denial of the “basic right” to self defense roughly two decades after the fall of the Soviet Union:

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike…

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people…Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology.  [Emphasis added]

The surprising article concludes with one last warning to Americans: “…do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.”

Click here to read the entire article, which originally appeared on the author’s personal blog.

(H/T: Gateway Pundit)



NRA Press Conference Regarding The Newtown Massacre

December 21, 2012 in 2nd Amendment, Constitutional, Founding Principles, Media Bias, Obamanation, Political Deception, President Obama, Socialism

Wayne LaPierre,  Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association, again calls for a policeman in every school.


Peter Schiff Corrects Rush Limbaugh

December 12, 2012 in Abuse of Power, Constitutional, Founding Principles, Liberty, Obama-Nomics

Peter Schiff Speaks out and corrects Rush based upon his understanding of  our Constitutional Founding Principles!

The nation that our Founding Fathers built is now in the throes of a political, economic, social and spiritual crisis. The solutions to our crisis lie in the writings of  our founders.

While Peter Schiff  hasn’t specifically labeled  the socioeconomic systems since our founding, it is clear that he is speaking to the economic philosophies depicted in the following chart.

Capitalism represents our Founding fathers believe in Natural Law and individual Freedom.

Socialism represents our departure from our Founding Capitalist Principles that began  accelerating in the early 20th Century.

Communism is  the sociopolitical- economic system that President Obama  is fervently attempting to force upon our society.


Comparison chart
Capitalism Socialism Communism
Philosophy: A theory or system of Social organization wherein Capital (or the “means of production”) is owned, operated, and traded for the purpose of generating profits for private owners or shareholders.In capitalism, individual freedom is above the state or society and  Capitalism stands for private property.  A theory or system of social organization based on the holding of most property in common, with actual ownership ascribed to the workers.In Socialism, society is above individuals. A theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, with actual ownership ascribed to the community or state.In Communism, society is above individuals and Private property is abolished by the state.