CCDL Litigation Fundraiser Poker Run Sept. 21

What is the Connecticut Restoration Coalition?

Press release: Connecticut Restoration Coalition 

Meeting June 1, 5 pm

75 Aircraft Road, Southington CT 06489

 KING 33 Training Center, http://www.king33training.com/

Connecticut Restoration Coalition has been formed to focus the efforts of all citizens in Connecticut.

From the CRC Website: 

"Realizing a need for timely and accurate communication throughout CT, we work with groups like CCDL, Oathkeepers, CT Carry, 1MMAGC-CT (and others) to form this coalition. We are not a group in of itself, but an organization that collects and provides information relevant to Connecticut residents when their rights and liberties are challenged.

We believe both the state and federal governments are heading in the wrong direction and we choose to fight! Bills, proposals, town hall meetings, and other events that you need to takeACTION on will be posted here.

Meeting:

We meet Saturday nights at KING33 in Southington (75 Aircraft Rd.) between 5-7pm. We welcome new like-minded speakers, have group leaders share, and have an open discussion of the next weeks calls to action in CT. We then set up plans, act on them, share information and return for the next week. Our goal is to get everyone calling, showing up at LOB/rallys/town halls and making their voices heard.

The people of the coalition are working together to maintain our constitutional rights! Please message us if you are interested in joining or come to the meeting! If you are a liberty or Constitution focused group in CT, we want to hear from you. Email us or come to one of the Coalition meetings."

___

Mission Statement:

To ensure that our Constitutional rights shall never be infringed, ever again.

Vision Statement:
It started here, we’ll restore it here.
The Constitution.

____

Contact:

eMail Here for Coalition related questions

Coalition Flyer:

Simple one is here.

Robust one (non-printer friendly) is here.

___

Visit Our Facebook Page:

“CT Restoration Coalition”

The site is updated throughout the day.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/CT-Restoration-Coalition/169947006486490

Guest Blog: Changing Neighborhoods, an Essay

Below is a essay by Middletown resident William Boylan. All opinions expressed are that of the author and not necessarily that of the Insider staff.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changing Neighborhoods, an Essay. By William Boylan

Alex Haley;s book, “A Different Kind of Christmas”, was given to me as suggested reading; something lighter than the usual reading fare to distract from the enormous problems our society faces at a turbulent time, in a turbulent world.

On page three, a phrase caught my eye and stuck in my mind as relevant,

“. . . changing neighborhoods is not always a solution to problems.”

You see, for the longest time the idea of fleeing my adopted state of Connecticut has lingered in the back of my mind.  Preventing it were finances, something not insurmountable but problematic and that Linda’s parents were still here and that she would never be able to leave them.  (can’t fault her for that)  Though I have some close friends, my family here is estranged, therefore I have no heavy anchor and so what other reason is there to remain?

Prodding me to leave is frustration and dismay over the political climate and the steady erosion of liberties by a legislature that ignores the Constitution.  Rampant taxation and debt, a populous willing to sacrifice liberty for a false sense of security, social and ethical decline, a shrinking income and an ever increasing cost of living are major contributors to my desire for a change of scenery.

Not being one to run from adversity though, something about the idea of fleeing just doesn’t rest well in my gut.

In junior high I was bullied until I got fed up one day and fought back . . . and won.  I was never picked on, again.  In fact, I earned a measure of respect from fellow classmates.

In high school, someone stole a watch my parents gave me for Christmas.  At 17, I filed a suit in small claims court . . . and won.

As an adult, I battled several unscrupulous landlords . . . and won.

Once, a prosecutor who didn’t like my attitude, brought me up on non-support charges, even though I was current and making regular payments to my ex.  She did this without standing.  My ex never filed a complaint for non-support, nor did the prosecutor ever talk to her about it.  I fought back . . . and won.  (I believe it cost the prosecutor her job.)

It just ain’t in me Irish blood to back down from a fight!

But, the fight we face today is not about me.  It goes far beyond my narrow, personal interest.  What we face today, is a battle for the future of our state and nation, and indeed the world.  If Liberty falls in America, the world will fall into the abyss with her.  We are certainly the last bastion of hope (outside Christ) for the world.  If Connecticut falls, so surely will another state fall, then another.  Before long, there may be nowhere left to run!  What of our children, grand children and generations yet unborn?  Our posterity has a stake in this, too.  What will be the legacy we leave unto them; liberty or tyranny?

What of the oath we took and renew each week at the Connecticut Restoration Coalition meetings; the oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic; the pledge of our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor, so help us God?  Do we fulfill that oath by fleeing?  Do we truly mean what we say or are our words hollow platitudes?

Maybe I think too much, but what of the Founders, the original American Patriots?  What of them?  What of their sacrifices?  What of their pledge of their fortunes, their lives, and their sacred honor?  They truly meant it and lived it.  Many lost everything they had; money, property, family, life.  What would they think of us if they could look down and see what we are doing, today?  Do we honor their sacrifices by running or do we follow in their footsteps and live as we speak?  Or, are we simply paying lip service to a romantic notion?

Our mettle is about to be tested; do we pass the test, or do we fail?

“. . . changing neighborhoods is not always a solution to problems.”

Bill Boylan, HSD (high school dropout)

AKA, Murphy’s Bain

Some of Connecticut’s Patriots, courtesy of the Connecticut Society of the Sons of the American Revolution, http://www.connecticutsar.org/patriots/

Patriot List

Isaiah Adkins - served the Connecticut Line for 6 years

Rev. Ebenezer Baldwin - a patriotic preacher.

John Barker, M.D. - citizen, patriot, doctor

Israel Bissel - alerted colonists of the British attack at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775.

General Henry Champion - a brave and efficient officer

Col. William Douglas - colonel of New Haven Regiment.

Oliver Ellsworth - Jurist, Statesman and Naturalist

Capt. John Gilbert - killed during the Battle of New Haven

Daniel Griswold - one of Knowlton's Rangers.

Capt. Nathan Hale - the man with only one regret.

Capt. Nathan Hale - 2nd version

Capt. Nathan Hale - 3rd version

Capt. Nathan Hale - scholarly report on Nathan Hale

Cmdr. David Hawley - whaleboat warfare on the sound.
CLICK TO CONTINUE LIST

Guest Blog: Giuliano Discusses 2nd Amendment

This week, Connecticut state lawmakers are holding public hearings regarding gun control and the Second Amendment. Former Mayor of Middletown and attorney Sebastian Giuliano responds to the Middletown Insider ‘s call for reader essays on the topic “ What does the Second Amendment Mean to You?” Below in his own words:

 Guest blogs do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Middletown Insider staff, and are published as a courtesy to readers.

Below in Giuliano's own words:

The Second Amendment is not limited to guns. It states that .  .  . the right of the people to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed." This includes any kind of "arms" - guns, knives, spears, swords, battle axes, maces and, when they are invented, phasers and lightsabres.

The Second Amendment did not "create" or confer any rights. It acknowledged a pre-existing right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms.

Let me ask a simple question:

What existed first, individuals with weapons, or armies (militias, if you prefer)? The answer is obvious. Armies were formed from armed individuals banding together (that's basically the definition of"militia"). Let me ask another question: At what point in human history was the inherent right of the individual to arm him/herself subsumed into the power of the state to raise an army? I cannot find any instance wherein free people made such a covenant or compact; I can only conclude that such rights, where they no longer exist, have been tyrannically usurped.

The individual has the inherent (for those of you who don't recognize the term "God-given") right to arm him/herself with weapons equivalent to those with which he/she might be threatened. For those who say that the Second Amendment only extends to muskets, blunderbusses and Kentucky rifles, I respond that those weapons represented the "state of the art" at the time; the framers of the Constitution clearly did not intend for the minions of the government to have such a deadly advantage over the citizens.

As much as I can recognize the damage that one individual bent on destruction can wreak with a firearm, I can't justify limiting the rights of the entire citizenry as an acceptable remedy. For every firearm used improperly there are countless, just like it, that are not and never will be. To attempt to paint millions of responsible citizens with the same broad brush and, thereby, limit their rights is something I will never accept and to which I will never accede.

I, frankly, decline to admit or deny that I may own a firearm It's nobody's business. But I do have a bit of a military background and I have been trained to handle some pretty scary stuff. I can tell you, without reservation, that all responsible gun owners and people who have ever fired a gun sincerely hope (and pray) that they will NEVER have to fire it at another human being; no person with a soul or conscience or thought or feeling would ever wish to be in that position. But they also don't want to be defenseless in the face of an attack upon themselves. For elected officials, who have sworn to preserve and protect the rights of each and every individual citizen, to be telling such citizens, of whose individual circumstances they are completely ignorant, what and how much they "need" is not only violative of their sworn duty, it is condescending, arrogant, contemptuous and downright insulting. I, for one, can never - and will never - support any political figure who demonstrates such an attitude, be it by his/her words or conduct.

Sebastian Giuliano

Guest Blog: An Army of None

An Army of None

Guest blog below by Tim D. Enchanter 
http://timdenchanter.blogspot.com/ 

“I am tired of having to choose between the Lesser of Two Evils so I’m staying home.”

“I’m not voting until my party gives me someone I can vote for instead of against.”

 “Political Parties are not constitutional so voting violates the Constitution.”

 “The President is Illegitimate so voting with him on the ballot is Illegal.”

     Does anyone else remember this “illegitimate” argument being used against Bush … or against Clinton?       Was either of them re-elected?  If you do not know the answer to that last question, then stop reading and go back to sleep.

     It astonishes me when some try to convince me and others to stay home and not vote in order to teach “The Establishment” a lesson.  It does teach them a lesson.  It teaches them that they can get you to stay home and not vote so that they will not have to deal with you.

     Let me explain this as simply as possible to all the brain donors out there who think that not voting gives you some sort of political power.  

     A vote not cast does not count.

The fewer people who vote, the more each vote counts because by not voting you give your vote to those who do vote.

     The so-called “Establishment” will never say this but they actually love low voter turnout.

Stolen From Face Book Files: Part 1

Unlike other local blogs that have hidden agendas and refuse to acknowledge what their local friends are doing in office, this blog is not afraid to have a different view at times.

Although the message in the jpeg does not represent all of the reporters and editors of the Insider, we thought it would fun to post something we saw on Facebook and take a really good look at it.  We look forward to fair discussion points with regard to the matter.

Make less than $120,000 a year? You might pay for 75% of Obama's news health care law.

Originally published in the 7/3/2012 edition of the Desert News

Read more: Opponents of health care overhaul highlight taxes in law, supporters push benefits

Americans making less than $120,000 a year will cover 75 percent of Obama's new health care law's costs, according to Stephen Moore, a senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal, via theblaze.com.

How much of a tax can families expect to pay if they don't have health insurance? In 2014, families would have to pay $285 and single individuals would have to pay $95, according to the article. But those numbers are scheduled to rise a considerable amount. By 2016, the tax for a single adult who doesn't purchase health insurance will be $695. A family would have to pay $2,085.

"I'll tell you this, for Americans who are going to have to pay these fines, penalties, taxes, whatever you want to call them … what we found is it's going to be pretty darn expensive," Moore told Fox News' Alisyn Camerota, according to the article. "The taxes phase in over time so next year they might be pretty modest, by about 2015 or '16, for families that choose not to buy health insurance, you're talking about a fine, Alisyn, that could be over $2,000 a year."

Obama's 9-9-9 Gas Plan

Many years ago voters rejected Republican presidential hopeful Steve Forbes' interesting 10% tax plan that proposed to do just that- tax every American ten percent of what they earn.  Years later, another presidential GOP contender Herman Cain proposed a tax plan that suggested, like Forbes' plan, controversial things such as: clarity, consistency, and common sense. Imagine if the government took out 10% every check and then when April rolled around folks wouldn’t be stressed out using their computer to figure out 1040A forms or running to H+R Block at all hours of the night? Would be pretty simple.

Recently the White House announced President Obama's 9-9-9 Tax Plan, a daring proposal that challenges  everybody to keep buying more and more gas. Don't like it? Plunk down  $64,000 and purchase a Chevy Volt and your local dealership. White House officials have also suggested that consumers should put fresh air in their tires every 200 miles and attempt to car pool or take a bus to work.  "In order to save the environment and save money on gas, consumers should buddy it up to work," said liberal filmmaker and Halliburton and Honeywell stockowner Michael Moore from his limousine.  Stars such as Barbara Streisand and Sean Penn have also come out to support the president's cause of convincing America to pay more for gas, "Although I own a fleet a cars and spend almost $22,000 a year to water my lawn during one of California's biggest droughts, I feel that the President is correct because he is a Democrat and our motto for the people is: do what we tell you to do, do not imitate what we do," Streisand said.

Meanwhile in the Nutmeg State, Democrat legislators are fighting Len Suzio, State Senator 13th District and his bid to cap the Connecticut gas taxes. Suzio's position is that the state needs to cap their "hidden taxes" and stop the practice of taxation without representation, a move that could potentially save CT residents thousands of dollars over the next few months.  The Democrats also proposed a plan to save the taxpayer pennies on the dollar or pennies on the pennies.  Confused? Don't feel bad, their proposal is to loop off a 1.5 cents for brief period in 2012 and then, guess what? It’s back to the old system in 2013 for everybody and then we can compare notes to see how many half cents we save at the pumps.

Our Bill of Rights Set to Music Performed at Wesleyan

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, set to music by Neely Bruce to be performed again at Wesleyan University, Thursday March 8 at 3:15 PM and 4:15 PM. The attached video is from an earlier performance and is only Part 1 of 8 Parts.

 

   

 

Click here for more information about this music and composer Neely Bruce. Also here is access to the other 7 videos.