Comments on: Fanning and Baldwin: ‘In This To Win’
By bocephusj57 on 11-21-11
A carpetbagging crackpot from Floriduh and a Fannypack 1%er practicing Chicago-style rhetoric.
Losers.
By Patriot Man on 11-21-11
Chuck Baldwin, a friend, a great patriot, and a rock solid man of his WORD. Bob Fanning, a superior business man and great person to have in the Montana sovereignty fight. Both men are great Montanan’s. A “Great Door has been opened for “all” of us Montanan’s”. Even for you bo! Definitely, a winning team.
By bocephusj57 on 11-21-11
They’re Montana residents, not Montanans. They are merely interstate immigrants.
Baldwin couldn’t break 200,000 votes, nationwide, in his Presidential run, I’ll be surprised if they can pull in 3,000 in this run at the state level.
The good news for Montana though is that we have a packed gooper clown car at the state level to enjoy on top of the gooper clown car at the Federal level. The laugh factor will be at epic levels.
By Old Salt on 11-22-11
Carpetbaggers.
By getman on 11-22-11
Dangerous ..Dangerous for Montana. Yes, we are natives. Yes, we know hard work. Yes, we have a ton of friends, neighbors, and family. Yes, we have spent generations, outdoors. We grew up on elk steak. My folks danced at the Eagles and went to the funerals of their friends. My dad was a Woods Boss for Royal Logging. Yes, we fished with a fly. We danced at Elk’s Rest. We ate at Hennesy’s. We baked a lot of pie and homemade bread. We danced at the grange. We fed so many. And we, so importantly, so importantly, beg people to understand..fully understand, Fanning and Baldwin are extreme and so dangerous for our state. Elect these two and elect a cult. It would cause all of Glacier and Conrad’s bodies to spin in their graves. Fanning and Baldwin mean spinning graves. Spinning graves.
By Walker on 11-22-11
Why is it that so much crazy is attracted to the Flathead? These carpetbagging men are delusional. Go back to where ever you came from. Montana doesn’t need your fanatical solutions.
By Mark W. on 11-22-11
Oh man, this is going to be fun.
By Patriot Man on 11-22-11
Chuck Baldwin, Liberty & Freedom, Constitutional Government and the Bill of Rights, Honesty, Truth, and the Christian Faith, nothing more, nothing less. Oh and besides, America was founded by Right Wing Extremists, So deal with it!!
By Old Salt on 11-22-11
BS, PM.
You need to read some history apart from the twisted rantings of Fox news and these goofy carpetbaggers.
And for your information, the reasonable centrist populous of this country are dealing with it. We are getting tired of your self centered, self serving, ill-conceived, ill-informed repetition of untruths and distortions about The Constitution and historical development of law.
Your Christianity has no more validity than any other religious foundation in this country. As for Honesty and Truth? Give me a break. Like most extremists, your honesty and truth (and that of these carpetbaggers) is whatever serves their selfish purpose. Nothing more, nothing less.
I’d be glad to help you make reservations back from where you came.
By Patriot Man on 11-22-11
Sorry, OS, no need for reservations, I am a second generation Montanan, born in the Flathead. There are hundreds of patriots on there way here, I will welcome them all. Like Mark W. said, this is going to be fun.
By Old Salt on 11-22-11
Cool. So what you’re saying PM, is that your’re part of an organized effort to colonize our area, push out the reasonable elements and take over, or at least heavily influence local politics for your extreme right wing agenda? Oh, by the way, there is nothing “patriotic” about what I see your group pushing.
A bit over four decades ago I met a minister from Eastern Montana who described growing up in 1920s and 30’s Germany. He watched helplessly as the right wingers there took over and suppressed reason and dissent. A great nation of reasonable people were led to ruin and genocide.
Now I’m not accusing your movement of that kind of extremism. But we’ve watched group after group of right wing wackos come to Montana, spew hatred, racism and violence.
I sincerely hope your group is not just one more of those, but I am haunted by that minister’s admonition, “Don’t ever believe that it can’t happen here.”
I wish you and your leaders well, but it breaks my heart to see this kind of movement come into the valley my family has inhabited for over a century.
By Westside2 on 11-23-11
Is it possible to reconcile the love of Jesus and with disgust for Chuck Baldwin? Stay tuned.
By Patriot Man on 11-23-11
OS, there is no organized effort. Patriots that are on their way are in search of a place where there are like minded people and who can live in Liberty and Freedom and secure those great American ideals for their children and grandchildren. Most of those that have came or are coming are being lead by our LORD.I hope that the message of truth and Constitution Government will not only heavily influence our local politics but eventually bring us back to where we were when our great nation was born.
Dr. Baldwin continually refers to what happened in Germany and how we must be vigilant to not let that ever happen here. He recommends and refers to the book “Hilter’s Cross” by Erwin Lutzer. A real eye-opener and in line of what the eastern Montana minister witnessed. Hitler was not a right winger, he was a Socialist tyrant.
This movement is not like the others you have witnessed. If it were, I would not be associated with it. We do not support tyranny and direction our Federal Government has taken. We feel that the FG has over stepped the bounds and controls of our Constitution. We feel that the FG has defaulted on their Contract with Montana to utilize the resources, such as timber, on our public lands. We feel that Montana should manage its lands and critters, not the FG. We are in total support of our local governments, friends, and all our neighbors. We want to preserve the Sovereignty of Montana, the place you and I have lived a lifetime. Dr. Baldwin is not a racist. I have never heard a racist word from him. We have several race’s other that white that regularly attend the Liberty Fellowship. They have expressed that they feel more welcome at the LF than most other places they have been.
Dr. Baldwin has never advocated violence. We do strongly support and will defend our Second Amendment right, and will defend our families and property for all enemies foreign and domestic.
Please, visit Pastor Baldwin’s website for archived weekly newsletters and sermon’s, chuckbaldwinlive.com. I think you will be surprised at what you don’t find.
Thank you for your best wishes and we only want to preserve what our families have cherished and enjoyed for all these years.
We all have so much to give “Thanks” for tomorrow.
By bocephusj57 on 11-23-11
Wow Fauxtriot man. One can only stand back and regard your screed of incoherent rightwingnut gibberish in wonderment.
The same wonderment that happens when looking at the art of Jackson Pollock and question if it’s displayed upsidedown.
By fourweight on 11-24-11
I say let these guys run - run wild and run loud! The Flathead right wing can sit back in their chairs and say “we are not nuts, we are not ruled by insantity etc…” Yeh….that works until insane nuts become leaders in your party.
Kind of like saying….“um….we ain’t so stupid…ummm never mind that Rick Perry guy and Bachman gal….”
If you accept and anoint leaders that confirm all the broad observations about your group, you solidify the observations!
By Eileen Wright on 11-24-11
Old Salt-
RE:“He watched helplessly as the right wingers there took over and suppressed reason and dissent.”
That statement seems a bit contrived in that; like the American left, 1930’s German socialists saw the State as a redemptive force that should be empowered to change society. They believed they could change, or alter human nature through programs to redistribute wealth and make everyone equal - (except the elitists, of course). They wanted to empower the government to control every aspect of private citizens’ lives from where they could live and what they could do with their property or business to their medical care.
They supported state socialism and like the occupy crowds they were anti-semites.
In regard to this conversation, sometimes people who are not native to a region but have seen destruction caused in other areas can be a benefit in stopping or stalling the same negative transformations from occurring locally. Their stand against Federal Government intervention is something people should listen to and think seriously about. States rights were an important factor in shaping and preserving our freedom.
By fourweight on 11-24-11
ummm….you mean state’s rights like allowing abortion as a state sees fit? Or, allowing gay people to marry…..Or allowing slavery…....or denying women the right to vote…....or promoting child labor exploitation…..
Fools like Balwin want to prevent states rights sometimes, promote them other times. Just like conservatives who hate activist judges until they need them to be activist.
Time to face it, without a strong federal government, we have guys like Baldwin telling us who to bow to, what whiskey we can’t drink and who we can marry.
I’ll pass
By Patriot Man on 11-24-11
Dr. Baldwin is for the Rights of the Separate States as guaranteed in the US and Montana Constitutions.
Individual rights for Montana citizens, such as abortion, gay marriage, medical MJ, etc. should be decided by Montana citizens/voters and not the Federal Government.
The Federal Government needs to be strong in the Enumerated Powers granted to in it the Constitution. History has proven that when the Federal Government assumes powers not granted “By the People”, it then develops into a strong tyrannical Government.
By bocephusj57 on 11-24-11
That was all settled in 1865. Your side lost. Deal with it.
Come join us in the contemporary existence of this millennium.
By laker1 on 11-24-11
Patriot Man: Article I of the Constitution of Montana (1972) provides: ” All provisions of the enabling act of Congress (approved February 22, 1889, 25 Stat. 676), as amended and of Ordinance No. 1, appended to the Constitution of the state of Montana and approved February 22, 1889, including the agreement and declaration that all lands owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the congress of the United States, continue in full force and effect until revoked by the consent of the United States and the people of Montana.”
This is the agreement between the federal government and the state of Montana. If you know of another, please post it or a citation to it.
If you search for a copy of the 1889 Montana Constitution, you will find Ordinance No. 1 which was adopted on February 22, 1889, by the Legislature of the Montana Territory. It says, in part, “That the people inhabiting the said proposed state of Montana, do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof, and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes, and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States,the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, . . .”
The “unappropriated public lands” are what are now called ‘federal lands’ and amount to 29.1% of the area of Montana. It really doesn’t matter what Fanning or Baldwin thinks about state’s rights or state sovereignty, Montana gave up any claim to this land more than a century ago.
Is there some other “contract” or “agreement” between the United States and Montana? If there is, could you provide a copy of it or reference to where it might be found so we can all read it? If you can’t, can you get a copy from Fanning or I don’t think this is unreasonable. If someone showed up and said I am taking your car under our agreement, wouldn’t you want to see the agreement and your signature on it? Would you take Fanning or Baldwin’s word that this guy was entitled to your car without seeing the contract? I think it was Ronald Reagan who popularized the Russian saying, “Trust but verify”.
Finally, the 9th and 10th Amendments aren’t any help here. Neither prohibit a state from giving up a claim or right which is what happened in 1889.
By laker1 on 11-24-11
Ahem, I was wrong. Ordinance No. 1 was adopted by the Constitutional Convention that met in Helena in August of 1889, not by the legislature in February. The Montana Supreme Court held that it was part of the Constitution. State v. Kenney, 9 Mont. 223.
By Patriot Man on 11-24-11
laker1,
I am not arguing who presently has ownership the land.
The Feds are not fulfilling their agreements on how they would manage those lands and what they would produce from those lands. The Federal payments from revenues generated from those lands, which a portion of were promised to Montana, its counties, and cities, have began to cease.
What do you suggest?
By laker1 on 11-25-11
Patriot Man:A fair question. Once again, could you provide a copy of the agreement or a reference to it? Suppose you buy a section of forest land and find me logging it. When you ask what I think I am doing, I reply that I have an agreement from 1889 that allows me to log this land. Wouldn’t you want to see it?
I only know of two documents from 1889 that contain agreements between the United States and the State of Montana. One is the Congressional act that admitted the six territories that year. It is “AN ACT to provide for the division of Dakota into two States and to enable the people of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington to form constitutions and State governments and to be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and to make donations of public lands to such States.” 25 U.S. Statutes at Large, c 180 p 676 et seq. I searched it for the word ‘forest’ and didn’t find any.
The other is the Montana Constitution of 1889. The only provision regarding forests is found in Article XIX, Section 3: “The legislative assembly shall enact suitable laws to prevent the destruction by fire from any cause of the grasses and forests upon lands of the state or upon lands of the public domain the control of which may be conferred by congress upon this state, and to otherwise protect the same.” Notice that Congress has to confer control of lands of public domain before the State can fight fires on those lands.
(continued)
By laker1 on 11-25-11
This may or may not help but another newspaper reported on the Fanning and Baldwin news conference. It said: “Asked by an audience member if the federal government owns land in Montana, Fanning said the state entered a contract with the federal government when the state was established in 1889 that ensured public lands would be managed for logging, mining and other forms of resource development. Since then, the Forest Service and other agencies have not lived up to the terms of that contract, he said.”Now there is an act of Congress which is referred to as “Forest Reserve Act of 1891”. Technically, it’s “An Act Making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, and for other purposes.” U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 30, Chap. 2, pp. 32-36, but whatever. The act provides at page 35: “No public forest reservation shall be established, except to improve and protect the forest within the reservation, or for the purpose of securing favorable conditions of water flows, and to furnish a continuous supply of timber for the use and necessities of citizens of the United States; . . .”
This sort of sounds like what you and Fanning are talking about. I am not sure and I could be wrong. There are three reasons why it would not be. First, it was passed in 1891, not 1889. Second, it doesn’t mention Montana but requires the forests be managed for “. . .the use and necessities of the citizens of the United States; . . .”. That means that New Yorkers and Californians get their say. Last, this is an act of Congress. Congress can and, I think, has amended it. It does not require any agreement from the states or any one state.
(continued)
By laker1 on 11-25-11
Finally, if you are referring to the payments proceeds from timber sales being paid to counties in lieu of property taxes, for example, the Twenty-Five Percent Fund Act of May 23, 1908 (Public Law 60-136), I don’t have any suggestions because I am not really sure I understand the reasoning behind them.I don’t know what, if any, costs Flathead County incurs because, what, half the county is national forest. Do sheriff’s deputies patrol the national forest lands? Does the county fight forest fires, build roads and do other things in the national forests? If it does, I would agree that the federal government should pay money in lieu of property taxes because that’s fair. But if the county doesn’t do any of this, it is just as unfair for the federal government to pay monies.
The other problem is that a quarter of the proceeds of timber sales may be too little or too much. As you point out, if there are no timber sales, it hurts. On the other hand, if there is a boom in lumber sales, the county and the taxpayers get an undeserved bonus.
So, my “off the top of my head” and “I know nothing about this” suggestion is to talk to Max and Denny and John about designing a system of payments that has some relation to the actual expenses. While I haven’t looked into it (it’s late), I think that that’s what Congress is trying to do.
By Patriot Man on 11-25-11
laker1
Thanks for your time, research, and clarifying some of these issues.
Hopefully, not only Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin are reading and digesting your comments, but also the other ten gubernatorial candidate teams are doing the same.
This will be a very interesting and exciting primary season.
A week from tomorrow, Saturday December 3rd, Bob and Chuck are scheduled to be at the Kalispell Gun Show. You all are welcome to come and visit with them about any of the issues or to state your concerns. I know they will listen to what you have to say.
By laker1 on 11-25-11
Patriot Man:
You wrote above: “We feel that the FG has defaulted on their Contract with Montana to utilize the resources, such as timber, on our public lands.”
Fanning is reported to have said: “the state entered a contract with the federal government when the state was established in 1889 that ensured public lands would be managed for logging,. . .”
I asked you to provide a copy of the “Contract” or a citation to it. You haven’t. If Fanning or Baldwin are reading this, they certainly can provide a copy of the “agreement” of 1889 or a citation to it. They haven’t.
When I go to the Fanning for Governor page and look under Contact, I find a link for Volunteer and one for Media. I am neither. You might qualify as a volunteer so why don’t you email him, get a copy of the Contract/agreement or a citation and post it here so we can all learn.
If not, then I guess you and Fanning have answered my question.
By Patriot Man on 11-25-11
laker1
The comment I made was based on Bob Fanning’s press conference comment you referred to above.
I am not media nor am I signed up as a campaign volunteer. However, I will attempt to find out the “contract” information he was referencing.
By laker1 on 11-25-11
I apologize for my abruptness. I did not know that you were relying on Fanning’s statement. Whether you want to pursue the matter is up to you.
If Montana had made an agreement with the federal government concerning the use of the forests in 1889, my assumption would be that it would be pretty common knowledge after 120 years and that I was the one who hadn’t gotten the memo. It would appear that no one knows of this agreement except Fanning. I don’t think that he came to Montana 16 years ago and found something that had gone completely unnoticed by the state, the feds and the entire timber industry for nearly a century. Nor do I think he made it up either. I think he’s just confused. Well, so am I but I am not running for governor.
If you do get anything other than the runaround, please post it here for all to see.
By kalispelling bee on 11-26-11
laker1, thanks for your questions.
I saw the quote about the contract supposedly between Montana and the federal government ensuring management of lands for logging. I wrote it off as more Baldwin crackpottery.
You questioned it and tried to research it. You are more ambitious than I. I really give you credit for trying to check it out.
By Patriot Man on 11-26-11
As this gubernatorial race ramps up, I think you will soon discover that Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin are in this campaign to “Win”.
Once you hear their message of truth, liberty, freedom, constitutional government, and Montana State Sovereignty, and how those ideals will benefit all Montanan’s and then compare it to the routine political rhetoric you will hear from the other candidate’s, your personal attacks and criticisms will wane.
By Turnrow on 11-26-11
Fanning, Baldwin, Gaede, Marbut, Stewart Rhodes represent nothing but trouble for the future of Montana, and as for Patriot Man’s statement “...there is no organized effort”. How dumb does he think we are? Does he think we’ve forgotten the Free State Project and that Montana was one of their targets? That recruiting continues to this moment.
Just a few reminders:
http://www.montanaforum.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2708
http://northwestfront.org/
http://home.dejazzd.com/richpalm/northwest_migration_handbook2.htm
http://northwestmigration.wordpress.com/northwestmigration/
By Patriot Man on 11-27-11
Bob Fanning is from Pray, Montana. He and Chuck Baldwin have known each other less than 60 days. They do not agree with any of the “white supremacy” beliefs of April Gaede. Gary Marbut has been fighting for our 2nd Amendment Rights for years. Stewart Rhodes believes that people that take the oath to protect and uphold the Constitution, should live up to that oath. Montana is a Free State, lets keep it that way for our prosperity.
By Old Salt on 11-27-11
Ah, Thanksgiving, my favorite pagan holiday, formerly known as “Evacuation Day”. We gather with family and friends to offer burnt offerings to various deities, whose inflated likenesses we gaily float down the streets of New York in front of their temple, Macy’s Department Store. Meanwhile, from the enclosed sacrificial alters, traditionally placed in every home (two in some of the more affluent homes) our burnt offerings send divine effluvium skyward to honor beloved woodland gods and goddesses, leaving only the baser parts of the sacrifice for us to humbly eat while circled around tables decorated with the spoils of mammon.
But alas, after all that joy I return to the reality of the racist invasion of Montana and northwest continental United States of America.
Good gravy, Turnrow, couldn’t you have found some less disturbing references, maybe painting a picture of little blue-eyed, blonde-haired boys and girls dancing around their campfires celebrating prosperity in ancestral sovereign lands granted them in documents signed the 1800’s?
Oh, maybe that was the indigenous first peoples who actually were granted sovereignty several times in the past couple hundred years.
I guess I get confused by many of the assertions by folks like PM and EW. Is the sky just a bit different color where they live? My thanks to Laker1, Turnrow, Fourweight and others for standing up with reason in the face of outrageous claims. The absolute volume of misinformation the followers without leaders produce is astounding. They must spend untold hours twisting historical facts to match their beliefs.
When I went away to spend time with my family I had intended to come back and address these untruths in order, but for now will take fourweight’s advice and let them have all the rope they need to hang themselves (metaphorically only, of course.)
For now it’s just really important that people in the Northwest United States of America understand that the agenda for these extremist groups is encapsulated in their writings, including those cited by Turnrow, above.
And that agenda, as written by some of their movement, includes violence and subversion against those who don’t agree with them.
By BiggerMig on 11-27-11
Not a chance.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.