Tuesday, April 10, 2012


++  ANDERSON, BRANAN, FIELDS & NEWBERRY, Good with Sharia Law in OK!


Our 12 noon luncheon for Wednesday, April 11th will be held at
Italiano’s restaurant, 4801 North Lincoln in OKC. I have been trying
for some time now to acquire a special speaker for this Wednesday and
if I am successful, the speaker will be one of the highest profile
people we have ever had at OCPAC. If I knew for sure the person would
be able to make it to our meeting, I would be billing this person as a
mystery speaker for reasons I can’t divulge. If this person is not
able to make it to our meeting, we will show a new 16 minute DVD,
which exposes the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a radical
leftist group, going far beyond whatever good they do for law
enforcement in America. I will also give a report about a recent law
enforcement seminar I attended to determine how much influence the
SPLC has with Oklahoma’s law enforcement organizations and if they
were being influenced to become suspicious of law abiding
constitutionalists, who have valid grievances with the federal
government. I will point out the difference between law abiding
citizens vs. others (those in the Sovereign Citizen movement) with
similar grievances, but have decided to work outside of the system to
achieve whatever results they are after. I will also talk about the
John Birch Society’s ramped up efforts educate citizens about the
importance of supporting your local police and why they must be kept
independent. I hope we have our mystery speaker, but if not this
information will be very important.

One more thing, the People’s World, official organ of the CPUSA
(Communist Party USA), published an article on Monday titled: Amid
racism and shootings, labor fights back, by Justin Shepherd. I can
only speculate that Justin may have taken a little too much LSD before
writing the article as his creative juices appear to come from planet
Mongo. Typical of the intellectually dishonest on the left, OCPAC, The
John Birch Society, the tea party members, Ron Paul supporters and
others are mentioned in the same breath with the KKK, kind of
associated with the shooting of the black folks in Tulsa and are
accused of “stacking meetings” of Occupy in Oklahoma with ‘our’
people. For you amusement or perhaps amazement, I will have a copy of
the article at the meeting. I believe we are on their radar screen
because we are now posting our meetings online. All of our meetings
are achieved at: http://www.youtube.com/user/ocpacvideo.

++  ANDERSON, BRANAN, FIELDS & NEWBERRY, Good with Sharia Law in OK!

This past Thursday, on a 6 to 9 vote, members of the Senate Rules
Committee voted down HB 1552, the legislation to take the place of
State Question 755, the constitutional amendment to prevent the use of
Sharia or Foreign law in our court system. In a statewide vote of the
people in 2010, that issue had the support of 70% of the people, but
was tied up in federal courts and struck down in Denver because the
term “Sharia Law” was used in the State Question.

Therefore, State Representative Sally Kern authored H.B 1552 to remove
the term “Sharia Law” and simply replace it with the term “foreign
law”. This legislation passed in the House on a bi-partisan vote of 76
to 3 in 2011, but wasn’t heard in the Senate until last Thursday.

People understanding this issue realize this was one of the most
important votes that will be cast by a lawmakers in their lifetime,
regardless if they serve one term or until they are term limited out
of office. Republicans voting against the bill, were: Patrick Anderson
(R-Enid 405 521-5630, up for re-election this year), Cliff Branan (R-
Nichols Hills to Bethany, 405 521-5543, in his final term), Eddie
Fields (R-Wynona, 405 521-5581, re-election in 2014) and Dan Newberry
(R-Tulsa 405 521-5600, up for re-election this year). Also voting
against the bill were 2 Democrats up for re-election this year, Earl
Garrison (D-Muskogee) and Jerry Ellis (D-Valliant).

Just as important were the 2 Republican Senators who missed this vital
vote, Mike Mazzei (R-Tulsa, 405 521-5675, up for re-election this
year) and Clark Jolley (R-Edmond, 405 521-5622 up for re-election this
year. Please call and ask these Republicans why they voted against the
bill or in the case of Mazzei and Jolley, ask them why they missed
this important vote?

I don’t know about Mazzei, but Jolley is being challenged in a heated
Republican primary race by Paul Blair, pastor of Fairview Baptist
Church in Edmond. Sources at the Capitol tell me the State Chamber of
Commerce is against this bill and in my opinion, Senator Jolley is
quite happy to do the bidding of the State Chamber. Yet he would not
want to vote against this bill since he is in a tough primary race and
70% of state voters want to be protected from Sharia Law or other
foreign laws from being used in Oklahoma’s courts.

Therefore, Jolley might be quite happy to hide in a Capitol broom
closet during this controversial vote and hope no one notices? Please
make your calls to these lawmakers and ask them why? Voting for the
legislation were Josh Brecheen (R-Coalgate), John Ford (R-
Bartlesville), David Holt (R-NW OKC), Anthony Sykes (R-Moore),
Jonathan Nichols (R-Norman) and Rob Johnson (R-Kingfisher), these
Senators deserve our thanks.


*  TUESDAY EVENING  -  ADA AREA  -  The Ada-Seminole Tea Party will
hold their monthly meeting tonight, April 10th at the Ada Chamber of
Commerce meeting room, 209 West Main street, 6:30 p.m. Speaking will
be 2nd District Congressional candidates George Faught and Markwayne

*  THURSDAY EVENING  -  ADA AREA  -  OK2A (Oklahoma 2nd Amendment)
will hold their monthly meeting, 6:30 p.m. at JD’s Café (911 North
Broadway) in Ada. The program will include Casey Wehrenberg with
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. This is so important to
understand as we just had another killing field occur on the campus of
a private college in California last week. Seven were killed and
others wounded as they were simply like sitting ducks in a fish bowl.
Had some professors or students with concealed carry permits been
allowed to carry on campus, the perp could have been stopped without
committing as much death and destruction as was accomplished.

*  THURSDAY EVENING  -  STILLWATER AREA  -  The Stillwater chapter of
OK2A will hold their monthly meeting this Thursday evening 7:00 p.m.
at Mexico Joe’s, 311 East Hall of Fame, in Stillwater.

*  FRIDAY  -  CENTRAL OKLAHOMA  -  The state chapters of the John
Birch Society will hold their second semi-annual recognition banquet
one week from Saturday. However, the deadline for reservations is this
Friday at 5:00 p.m. JBS Field Coordinator Mike Sawyer will share some
of the successes of the Birch Society on national issues. I have been
asked to talk about activism, what it is, what it is not, how to be
effective and what it produces. The cost is $15 per person, with the
banquet beginning at 6:00 p.m. The location will be the Character Inn,
524 West Main, in downtown OKC. For reservations please call (405)
348-9991 or make a check out to OKLAHOMA PROJECTS and mail it to 415
West 15th Street #2, Edmond, Ok 73013. If you need other information,
please contact Bob Donohoo at (405) 436-5412.

*  SUNDAY EVENING  -  YUKON AREA  -  Brigitte Gabriel, founder of Act
For America, the largest grass-roots citizen action network dedicated
to preserving national security and combating Islamic supremacy, will
be speaking at Trinity Baptist Church (620 N. Cemetery Road) in Yukon.
That is this coming Sunday evening, April 15 at 7:00 p.m.. Brigitte’s
family were Lebanese Christians hiding in their homeland for 7 years
while hunted by radical Muslims. She is a very powerful voice exposing
the many facets of the threat from the radical Muslims in our own
nation. If at all possible, you should not miss hearing from this
courageous lady.

*  NEXT MONDAY EVENING  -  EDMOND AREA  -  Brigitte will also speak
Monday evening April 16th at Fairview Baptist Church (1230 North
Sooner Road), starting at 7:00 p.m.. Brigitte has authored 2 New York
Times best sellers, BECAUSE THEY HATE and THEY MUST BE STOPPED. Based
on the pitiful vote in the Senate last Thursday, not nearly enough
Oklahomans and especially their elected officials understand the
seriousness of this issue.


This past Friday, Senator Steve Russell and I debated at the High Noon
Club on the merits of calling for a federal constitutional convention.
I only bring it up because it is an important issue that isn’t going
away, though it appears to be dead this session.

Bob Dani, club founder told both Steve and I that several people,
perhaps as many as 8 or so had told him they believed this was the
best meeting ever for the High Noon Club. I believe what impressed
many was that two opposing sides could be passionately debated, it was
educational, a humorous word picture was painted and no one got mad at
each other. I would say that shows the level of maturity of those in

Both Steve and I had a total of only 16 minutes and Ed Murray did a
great job of keeping us in line regarding the time. The issue is so
important that I wanted to go over some points in this e-mail. The
legislation authored by Senator Russell would call for Congress to
convene a constitutional convention for the purpose of amending our
Constitution to prevent Congress and the President from raising the
debt ceiling without at least 26 states voting to approve of such.

With my opposition to calling for a con-con, one of our friends
suggested that I was acting like a hypocritical elitist and opposing
state rights, something he has always heard me promote. I am not
opposed to such an amendment, what I oppose is the very dangerous
means to get to the amendment. In other words, the end does not
justify the means. Conceptually, the Amendment looks good, it likely
would NOT hurt anything and offers a level of Federalism, so missing
in our nation today.

However, this amendment, if passed, would be worthless in actuality
based on human nature and the deplorable condition of our nation’s
citizens of today. I will describe that condition as ignorant of the
principles of good government, ignorant of economics and free market
capitalism. Most professing Christians are unable to take Biblical
principles and translate them to good government policy and then we
have the very large dependent class, shamelessly acting like leaches
sucking the life blood out of the producers which are trying to keep
this nation afloat.

Such an amendment would be worthless in practice because you couldn’t
come close to finding 26 states that would say to the federal
government, you can’t raise the debt limit, and know that such an
action would turn the tap off to hundreds of millions of federal
dollars pouring into each of their states. It doesn’t appear that
Oklahoma lawmakers can even find the courage to say no to funding the
leftist OETA organization with 3 to 4 million dollars each year, much
less say no to receiving hundreds of millions of federal dollars
coming to Oklahoma through all kinds of grants, subsidies, and kick-

I am not talking about not receiving back from the federal government
what the taxpayers of Oklahoma send to Washington such as taxes for
defense spending, money for roads and bridges, as well as social
security and Medicare dollars. I am talking about the 1.5 Trillion
borrowed or newly printed dollars which make up our annual deficit
spending, thus adding to our national debt.

With that said, the real essence of the debate centered on whether or
not a constitutional convention, if convened, could be limited to only
one issue? Senator Russell believes it can and I believe it can’t.

Let’s look at some important perspectives on that idea. Following our
war of Independence we were governed by the Articles of Confederation.
There were a few problems with the Articles, so a constitutional
convention was called in 1787 to solve just a few specific issues.
Once convened, the convention worked behind closed doors, threw out
the Articles and created the Constitution we have lived under since
that time.

In Article 5 of the Constitution, provision is made for 2/3rds of the
States to petition Congress to convene a con-con anytime it may be
deemed necessary. Though it would be Constitutional, another
convention has never been convened since the one back in 1787. Oh the
states have issued calls for a convention many times and for many
different issues, but there has never been the necessary 2/3rds of the
states call for a convention on the same issue.

Senator Russell kept referring to the many calls of the past as if
that meant something? What he didn’t mention is that about a fourth of
the states have voted to rescind all their past call for a con-con,
including Oklahoma. Perhaps he didn’t bring that up since Oklahoma
voted to rescind all our previous calls in 2009, and yes Senator
Russell voted to rescind all our previous calls.

So if calling for a con-con is constitutional, and is a tool for the
states to reign in a tyrannical federal government, God knows we have
that today, then why has it never been used? I believe we have to look
no farther than the words of James Madison, considered to be the
father of our Constitution. Following the convention of 1787, we went
through a grueling and rancorous debate in the states between the
Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Ratification could have gone
either way and during that debate, some were calling for the
Constitution to be scrapped and to convene another convention and
start all over again. Therefore, Madison issued the following warning
about convening another con-con during rancorous times when he

“If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole
purpose of revising the Constitution, it would naturally consider
itself as having a greater latitude than the Congress… It would
consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election
into it would be courted by the most violent partisans on both sides…
[and] would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who,
under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts… might
have the dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the
fabric… Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by
the first Convention, which assembled under every propitious
circumstance, I should tremble for the result of a second, meeting in
the present temper in America.” [From a letter by James Madison to
G.L. Turberville, November 2, 1788.]

Madison warned us about calling for another convention, and many other
contemporary voices have warned us that once a convention is convened,
it CAN NOT be limited to one or more specific issues. Following are
some of those voices:

Former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Warren Burger wrote in
a letter to Phyllis Schlafly on June 22, 1988:  “I am glad to respond
to your inquiry about a proposed Article V Constitutional Convention.
I have been asked questions about this topic many times during my news
conferences and at college meetings since I became Chairman of the
Commission on the Bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution, and I have
repeatedly replied that such a convention would be a grand waste of

I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way
to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The
Convention could make its own rules  and set its own agenda. Congress
might try to limit the convention to one amendment or to one issue,
but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a
Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if
we don’t like its agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed
by the Confederation Congress ’for the sole and express purpose.’

….. A Constitutional Convention today would be a free-for-all for
special interest groups, television coverage, and press speculation.

Our 1787 Constitution was referred to by several of its authors as a
’miracle.’  Whatever gain might be hoped for from a new Constitutional
Convention could not be worth the risks involved. A new Convention
could plunge our Nation into constitutional confusion and
confrontation at every turn, with no assurance that focus would be on
the subjects needing attention. I have discouraged the idea of a
Constitutional Convention, and I am glad to see states rescinding
their previous resolutions requesting a Convention. In these
Bicentennial years, we should be celebrating its long life, not
challenging its very existence. Whatever may need repair on our
Constitution can be dealt with by specific amendments.”

The following is from Arthur Goldberg, a former Supreme Court Justice
and member of the advisory board of Citizens to Protect the

“As we look forward to celebrating the bicentennial of the
Constitution, a few people have asked, “Why not another constitutional

 I would respond by saying that one of the most serious problems
Article V poses is a runaway convention. There is no enforceable
mechanism to prevent a convention from reporting out wholesale changes
to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Moreover, the absence of any
mechanism to ensure representative selection of delegates could put a
runaway convention in the hands of single-issue groups whose self-
interest may be contrary to our national well-being.

A constitutional convention could lead to sharp confrontations between
Congress and the states. For example, Congress may frustrate the
states by treating some state convention applications as invalid, or
by insisting on particular parliamentary rules for a convention, or by
mandating a restricted convention agenda. If a convention did run
away, Congress might decline to forward to the states for ratification
those proposed amendments not within the convention’s original

Ultimately, the courts would be called upon to decide these matters.
This raises unprecedented problems. If every disgruntled convention
delegate, member of Congress, state legislator or concerned citizen
could sue at any time, a convention could mire the federal and state
governments in a debilitating web of lawsuits….”

I also referenced a recent voice from the current Virginia Attorney
General Ken Cuccinelli, a national hero for winning the case that
persuaded a federal judge to declare ObamaCare unconstitutional. He
was also the attorney arguing before the Supreme Court a couple of
weeks ago on behalf of the plaintiffs on day 2 or 3 of the 3 day oral
arguments. On the steps of the state capitol in Richmond VA. On
January 17th of this year, when asked about a runaway con-con, he
said:  “Yes, it is true that once you assemble a convention that
states have called, they can do anything.”

I also offered many articles written by constitutional law professors,
both from the left such as Larry Tribe from Harvard to Charles Rice
from Notre Dame, all stating that a con-con can’t be limited once it
is convened. To argue otherwise is a bit of wishful thinking,
especially in view of such a body of witnesses and warnings.

In my 3 minutes to cross examination Senator Russell, I asked a series
of yes or no answers as to whether or not he was aware of the book:
THE EMERGING CONSTITUTION written by Rexford G. Tugwell (1974 by
Harper and Row) and his answer was no.

The reason for this line of questions is that about 20 years ago I
attended a seminar in Tulsa to listen to a Constitutional Law
Professor, by the name of Dr. John Eidsmoe, author of the book
CHRISTIANITY AND THE CONSTITUTION. Also speaking that day was a lady
from Tulsa that closely followed all the efforts sponsored by the Ford
and Rockefeller Foundations to create a new Constitution and have it
waiting in the wings should a con-con ever be convened. At that time
it was in its 32nd version.

I asked Senator Russell if he had ever heard of the CENTER FOR THE
STUDY OF DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS, recently headed by socialist leaning
University of Denver Chancellor Maurice B. Mitchel? His answer was no.

This is the organization behind the 40th revision of the constitution,
Senator Russell if he had ever read this new version of the
constitution which is waiting in the wings, should a con-con ever be
convened. His answer was no.

I asked Senator Russell if he had ever considered that some of the
organizations pushing for a con-con may be taking advantage of the
good intentions of conservative organizations and lawmakers such as
himself? To his credit he did answer yes, it was a possibility.

Bottom line, the good guys in America are in a minority today, if we
ever convene a con-con, we are not likely to improve our lot through
such an effort. Rather than waste our time on such foolishness, we
must double down on Christian evangelism and teaching our fellow
citizens as to the superiority of the ideas of liberty and those of
our founding fathers. Our problem is not with our document, our
problem is that our citizens are NOT well educated about it and not
involved. If they were, we would have congressmen in Washington who
would abide by it and not overspend us into oblivion.

It is true that I pulled some antics during the debate to paint a
vivid word picture that would hopefully remain in the minds of those
in attendance. I did wear a coat and tie along with walking shorts. I
had on one brown sock and one white along with one black shoe and one
white. I pointed out that if a con-con were convened we might come out
with a hodgepodge and patch work looking something like the way I was
dressed. I also had a box labeled as Pandora’s Box and suggested a con-
con would be the equalivant of opening that box. I pulled out of the
box 2 jars of the rankest stink bait ever made to show how a con-con
could really stink things up. In addition I opened a can of worms,
dumped them on a plate and then tried to keep them from running away
off of the plate, to signify what a run-away convention might look
like. I also picked up several of the worms that I suggested had names
on them. Names like the elimination of the 2nd Amendment, the RIGHT to
health care from womb to the tomb and etc. My final antic was to
suggest calling a con-con would be like trusting the future of America
to a roll of dice. I rattled some dice and threw them down on the
table and hollered “snake eyes”.

To sum it up, even though most in Washington ignore the Constitution
or pervert it, there are elements in our nation that would still like
to eliminate its objectionable parts so conservative
constitutionalists such as ourselves will not even have such a
document to point to. Senator Russell is a good man and a real
patriot, I just believe he has been deceived on this issue and is
being used by people who aren’t patriotic.  We must stay vigilant on
this issue as it will not go away.


*  TULSA AREA  -  Katie Henke, the Republican Candidate for House
District 71 in Tulsa is 3 votes behind as a result of last Tuesday‘s
special election, even after the 4 good provisional ballots were
counted. She has called for a recount using the paper ballots, which
will be the first recount since we have started to use our new voting
machines. It will be interesting to see if they are more accurate than
the old machines, which usually were a few votes off, when recounts
occurred using the paper ballots. Either way, I sure hope Mrs. Henke
will file for the seat this Wednesday through Friday as the outcome
this November is not likely to be nearly this close or in the favor of
the Democrat. This November, hordes of Oklahoma voters will go to the
polls to vote out President Obama and far more of them will vote down
line for the Republican candidates than will vote for Democrats. Katie
could win big time in November.

*  TIME TO FILE FOR OFFICE  -  STATEWIDE  -  This Wednesday through
Friday will be the time period for candidates to file for office to
run for the state legislature, congress, corporation commission or
several of the county offices. This filing period has been moved up
almost 2 months and the primary elections will be held on June 26th.
As such we will be interviewing Republican primary candidates starting
on Wednesday, April 25th. Candidates endorsed by the voting members of
OCPAC will have checks cut for them on that day. That is why it is
important to raise as much as possible now so we have an idea as to
how much money will be available during this election cycle.
Therefore, if you have considered joining OCPAC but have not done so
as yet, please consider doing so at this time. Instructions on how to
join follow my sign off.

I look forward to seeing everyone this Wednesday.

Charlie Meadows

No comments: