The Republican Liberty Caucus of Northeast Florida had a crowd of well over one hundred people for its first meeting at the Four Points by Sheraton.

Cal Heseman opened with the Patriot’s Pledge, then RLCNEF Chairman John Stevens recognized the guests and gave an overview of the RLCNEF, its mission, values and goals.

In light of the cancellation of Marco Rubio’s appearance, his campaign offered Representative Aaron Bean to be the surrogate speaker on behalf of Rubio. Bean gave a compelling overview of the US Senate race, state and national politics.

Following Bean’s remarks, RLCFL Chairman Will Pitts, was interviewed by Radio Host Doug Kosarek. The interview contained questions pertaining to how an RLC endorsed candidate for the US Senate race might stand on specific policy issues. Chairman Pitts’ remarks were educational, stimulating and enlightening.

At the conclusion of this interview, the audience members were able to ask questions of Chairman Pitts and Representative Bean.

After the forum, three new events coming up for the RLC were introduced. Savannah Poole gave the details for the Members Only Cocktail Party on March 19^th. Mike Durden and Cliff Johnson explained the importance of the upcoming RLCFL Lobby Days in Tallahassee on March 22^nd and 23^rd. Kristi Dunn gave an overview of the Leadership Institute classes for Liberty Activists that will take place at the Four Points by Sheraton on May 1^st and 2^nd.  Information on all three events can be found on the RLCNEF website.

Charlie Shephard spoke about his company Community Advisors, LLC, the sponsor for this month’s meeting.

Chairman Stevens wrapped up by announcing the next regular meeting on April 6th.  At the meeting, there will be a vote on the RLCNEF bylaw revisions, as well as elections to fill the positions of Vice Chairman, Secretary, and Treasurer (and any other vacancies on the Board).

Some comments regarding the meeting:

“The meeting was great. I would have loved to hear more from Mr Pitts. He was very informative. I loved the format. At the same time, I liked that John interrupted in the interest of time. It showed that the RLC recognizes that our time is valuable. Over all, I give the meeting 2 thumbs up!” –Lesa Melaugh

“Outstanding format. Will Pitts is such a great communicator.” – Mike Austell

“Thought it was great.  Beautiful place, and I think it is a dynamite place to have your monthly meetings.  Thought, in spite of Rubio canceling, you got a pretty darned decent turn out.  I had a great time and really enjoyed doing the food table thing!  Many very, very nice people, and everyone seemed to enjoy the event.” – Pat McBride

For more information on any of these events please see the RLCNEF Calendar at www.rlcnf.org

Next Board meeting: March 31, 2010, Office of WG Pitts

Next Regular meeting: April 6, 2010, Four Points Sheraton (8520 Baymeadows Rd.)

1 Corinthians 10:29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but  of the other:
for why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience?

Why is it that the newly energized liberty movement has only enjoyed marginal support amongst the so-called religious right? In the early days of the Ron Paul 2008 presidential campaign I can remember thinking that Dr. Paul is one of the first liberty centered candidates who will be a slam dunk with this faith based segment of the Republican Party. After-all, a grandfatherly figure married to the same woman for more than fifty years; A pro-life OBGYN who delivered over 4,000 babies, and a military veteran who is an outspoken advocate of the Christian Just Theory of War seemed like the Christian Coalition Super Candidate. However the Ron Paul R[evol]ution failed to produce overwhelming numbers of faith based supporters within the rank and file of the GOP.  As someone who has always considered himself to be a cultural as well as a fiscal conservative, I was anxious to understand why my brothers & sisters of faith were not on the same page as me.

I began by taking a close look at my own personal transition from a faith and religion centered political philosophy to a liberty and freedom focused philosophy. Did this transition make me a believer in moral relativism? Did it weaken my faith in God? Certainly not, but it did cause me to re-examine the proper role of government when it comes to cultural, religious and moral issues. And I believe it is here where the real conflict and disconnect between the two groups lies. To illustrate, consider three issues where traditional religious right conservatives and liberty minded activists usually part ways: Drug Legalization, Gay Marriage and Prayer in School.

Drug Legalization
It is generally agreed upon by both the religious right and liberty activists that the use of drugs causes more harm than good. And it is also agreed upon by many in both camps that an individual who is engaged in drug use is acting immorally. Furthermore both groups see a need, perhaps even an obligation, to work to minimize this activity in our society. The conflict only arises when one group (the religious right) favors using the force of government to minimize drug use while the other group (liberty activists) stand in opposition to such an approach.

Gay Marriage
Most people of faith believe the institution of marriage is a sacred institution that should be preserved in its traditional form of a one man, one woman lifelong committed union. Many (not all) liberty activists share the same view. The conflict again arises when one group (the religious right) favors using the force of government to enforce this belief while the other group (liberty activists) is opposed to any and all governmental interference in the institution of marriage.

Prayer in School
Most people of faith believe that if we as a society had a greater focus on God and spirituality via public prayer we could improve many of our cultural problems.  And again many (not all) liberty activists share the same view, but are in conflict when they are told that the force of government should be used to promote this behavior. There does however seem to be a consensus from both groups that the force of government should not be used to prohibit such behavior.

When it comes to each of these three issues, the behavior being regulated by government does not directly impact the freedom and liberty of anyone besides the individual whose behavior is being regulated. Yes, drug use many times leads to behavior that impacts the freedom and liberty of others – but it is possible for the behavior in and of itself to affect no one but the person choosing to engage in the behavior. And the moment it does cross the line, most everyone is in agreement that the force of government is acceptable to remedy the injustice. In the case of gay marriage it could be argued that over time a prevalence of gay marriage would weaken the traditional family, but the fact is that when two people choose to call themselves married it has no direct effect on the freedom and liberty of anyone else but themselves.  And in the case of prayer in school, the person who chooses not to pray is the only one being directly impacted by a government regulation forcing them to pray. So the central question is whether or not the use of government force is justified in promoting moral behavior or prohibiting immoral behavior.

Aside from the effectiveness and obvious lack of constitutional authority for government to delve into these issues, you should consider the inconsistencies in regulating moral behavior. There are seven deadly sins, but yet the religious right is not advocating using the force of government to reduce gluttony, greed, avarice or lust. Why not? I mean if the general premise behind laws against drug use, gay marriage and laws mandating prayer in schools is righteous, why not make laws that will promote all moral behavior and prohibit all immoral behavior? I think the answer is obvious. This is not the proper role of government. It is the role of individuals, families, Churches, charities, civic organizations etc. to promote “good behavior” and hopefully raise the standards of moral conduct in our society.  Faith is not the foundation of freedom – individual liberty is the foundation of freedom.

When I first moved from a faith and religion centered political philosophy to a liberty and freedom focused philosophy I felt a little guilty because it seemed as though I was downplaying the importance of the culture war in today’s society. I was no longer in the same political camp as groups like Focus on the Family, The Christian Coalition or Huck’s Army. I know I shared many of their ultimate goals but I was just no longer comfortable with their approach or with their willingness to use government as a means to an end.  However, I still feel that there is no more pressing issue facing our nation than promoting a moral culture. Capitalism, Free- Enterprise, Individual Liberty, and even a constitutionally controlled federal government will ultimately fail in an immoral and decadent society.  I have since reconciled this conflict by fully understanding the proper channels to achieve progress in both liberty and faith. I have also come to the realization that there is a natural home for the religious right within the liberty movement and that understanding the proper roles that Faith and Liberty serve in our society is the first step to increasing the ranks of both.

John Stevens
RLCNEF Chairman

Positive thinking is a mental attitude that admits into the mind, thoughts, words and images that are conductive to action and then success. It is a mental attitude that expects good and favorable results. A positive mind anticipates happiness, joy, health and a successful outcome of every situation and action.

Many of us are passionate about politics and often get so caught up in what we are fighting against, that we tend to forget what we are fighting for, what we represent and why it is important to us.

Why is it important to frame what we say as political activists in a positive manner? Because while negative tactics in politics often involves “getting things done at the expense of others” and “being willing to win while others lose,” positive politics is the ability to influence opinions, obtain resources and work with people to get things done.

When we practice positive politics we are acting in the service of our organization and our mission. We become powerful advocates for our stated cause. While building an understanding and mutual network of support with those around us. Even those that do not fully understand what we are fighting for are willing to listen when the message is framed in a positive light.

In debate class, students quickly learn that whoever frames the message in the most positive manner wins the debate. This is an important skill for those of us fighting for Liberty to understand and incorporate in our interactions with others.  As an example, when the abortion argument began, both sides of the debate fought to see who would be able to best “frame the message” which they believed would recruit more followers to their viewpoint.  One side started calling those who were against abortion “anti-choice.” The opposing side responded by framing those who were for abortion as being “pro-death.”  Today, this framed marketing message has polarized both groups into the Pro-life / Pro-choice movement.  This matters because it clearly states what they are fighting for and not what they are fighting against, thus attracting people to the cause.

Those of us fighting in the liberty movement should understand the physiological way that others respond to the message that we are presenting. We need to be able to articulate what we are for, instead of always with what we are against.

If we want to be leaders in our respective political parties, we need to be able to communicate a clear, positive, call to action to potential supporters. Outstanding leaders are able to positively express an ideological vision congruent with the deeply-held values of their followers. Real leaders display a passion for, and have a strong conviction about what they regard as the moral correctness of their vision. They engage in outstanding or extraordinary behavior and are willing to make tremendous self-sacrifices in the interest of their vision and mission. We need to learn to do this in order attract people to the cause of Liberty and communicate with them the importance of what we are trying to accomplish.

Once we learn to “frame the Liberty Message” in a positive, upbeat way, we will have more curious bystanders join our cause.  Those who are apprehensive will begin to listen. People become fascinated with and are drawn to a message of hope and encouragement. After all, the ultimate goal is attracting more people to our message of Liberty and Freedom.

How do we frame the issues that are important to us in a positive manner:

Our opposition to the Patriot Act- We support protecting all American’s privacy and personal liberties.

Opposition to the current managing of the Federal Reserve- We support a sound monetary policy that is transparent to all Americans

Not being willing to Vote for the lesser of 2 evils in elections- We believe American’s should only vote for someone whom they agree with on fundamental Republican principles.

Our Opposition to unprincipled republicans such as Charlie Crist, John Thrasher and other such as them- We support holding all Republicans accountable because it is the only way to insure our party remains true to its principles.

Our opposition to Interventionist Foreign Policy- We support a Constitutional approach to foreign policy thus allowing us to build a strong national defense.

RE: Republican Party Purge

Mr. Beck,

We are writing to tell you about a systematic purge that is occurring, the stifling of free speech and the removal of certain voices of dissent from the Republican Party of Florida.

In recent months there has been a concentrated effort to remove American patriots that are calling for accountability among the Republican Party of Florida leadership, specifically,  Florida Republican Chairman Jim Greer.

The Republican Liberty Caucus (www.RLC.org)  is a group of Republicans working within the Republican Party to return the party to its conservative roots. We believe that we must stand up for individual liberties, limited government and fiscal responsibility. We fight for these principles without regard to party affiliation and with the same vigor and passion exemplified in our Founding Fathers. We believe that if we don’t, we will continue to lose our liberties one by one.

For this principled stand we have been singled out to be purged from party leadership. Several official grievances, against Republican Liberty Caucus men and women were filed in July 2009 with the Republican Party of Florida.

The specific “charges” against Republican Liberty Caucus State Chairman Will Pitts and Northeast Florida Chairman John Stevens include:

1. Attended a Pro-America Rally in Minneapolis hosted by the Campaign for Liberty and wore a “Ron Paul” button on their lapel after the Republican primary.

2. Attended an End the Fed (Federal Reserve Bank) Rally in Jacksonville

3. Spoke or written things in a manner harmful to the GOP especially regarding RPOF Chairman Jim Greer and Gov. Charlie Crist by stating they are “pathetic and embarrassing” and other comments regarding Senator John McCain and President George Bush.

The Republican Party of Florida is basing their complaints and the ensuing expulsion on the new wording of the Loyalty Oath that is required to be signed by all party leadership within the State.

The last part of this oath reads:

“I further swear and affirm that I will not engage in activities or conduct that may be deemed by the Grievance Committee and affirmed by the RPOF Chairman as likely to injure the name of the Republican Party or interfere with the activities of the Republican Party.”

Many of us attended the Grievance hearing, in which these men and women had to defend their patriotism and ‘loyalty to the party”, not the country or it’s Constitution, or even the principles of The Party but to “The Party” itself.

These men, who have fought for the Republican Party, and its core principles in a way that few will ever know, had to ‘prove’ they had not injured the Party, as determined by grievance board member that were specifically appointed by Chairman Greer.

It is interesting to note that the original grievance complaint against John Stevens and Will Pitts sent to Jim Greer was written by someone (William Blythe) that has never met either of these men let alone address his grievance with them. Mr. Blythe also did not see fit to even attend the grievance hearing to defend his complaint.

It is also of value to note that grievances against Republican Liberty Caucus members were filed in several counties around Florida at the same time, which lends credibility to this being a systematic “party purge”.

It is our wish that you will investigate this matter further and make this purging a public matter.

This is the price we are paying in Florida for being independent thinkers and standing up for the cause of liberty.

Fighting for Liberty,

Kristi Dunn

Mskristidun@aol.com

Kimberly Wells

kimberly@silverwebdesigns.net

Erik Setzer

rlcsrcibe@gmail.com

Savannah Poole

Savvy7s@aol.com

And over 75 other Patriots fighting for liberty around the country

Additional Links and information:

About the Party Purge:

http://rlcnews.org/?p

http://www.rlc.org/2009/07/10/stjohns-gop-bullies/

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2009/09/boss-greer-accused-of-party-purges/comments/page/2/#comments

http://www.rlc.org/2009/07/15/floridas-gop-purge-intensifies/

http://www.rlc.org/2009/07/10/gop-chair-removes-long/

More about the Republican Liberty Caucus:

http://www.rlcnef.org/liberty-guide/