Restore The GOP

Brian Brady Endorsements Listed in Family Voter Guide

The Family Voter Guide is a compendium of local endorsements and will be distributed to most local churches in San Diego County.  I was fortunate the "make the cut" by being endorsed by the San Diego Tea Party and The American Patriots Coalition PAC (pro-Life, pro-family, constitutional conservatives who believe in limited government).

Read the full  Family Voter Guide

I'll be visiting the Tri-City Tea Party on May 15th and the San Diego Tea Party on May 23rd.  I hope you'll join me.

Brian Brady about Ron Paul Visit in the U-T

Presidential candidate Ron Paul visited UCSD this past Friday night (which is in the 78th Assembly District).  The rally attracted about 5,000 people including Dan Hughes, candidate for US Senate and Monica Gaither, Mia Freymiller, Maureen Guffanti, Eric Andersen, Mat Huff, and Josh Silverman, all of whom are candidates for the San Diego County Republican Central Committee.

I was quoted in the article, written in the San Diego Union-Tribune, about his visit:

His message of limited government, sound money, a noninterventionist foreign policy and fidelity to the Constitution resonates with 15-20 percent of the Republican base but is accepted by more than half of those under 30, said Brady, a member of the Republican Liberty Caucus of San Diego.

Many youths previously captivated with President Barack Obama’s rhetoric have come to realize that liberty made this country great and are flocking to the consistent critic of the state. However, that message has been dampened by the media bias against Paul, Brady said.

It's no secret that I admire Congressman Paul for advancing the cause of Liberty.  His policies about monetary policy, fiscal policy, the failed war on drugs, and free market economics resonate with me.  While I sometimes disgree with the rhetoric he chooses, his message of not using our military to nation build or police the world, is consistent with the Founders and worthy of pursuit.

I was invited to volunteer at a luncheon that day by the campaign.  I spent about ten minutes with Congressman Paul before we started.  We spoke about how a debased currency contributes to moral decay in society.  The conversation was initiated by me and he listened intently while I repeated to him what he has been saying for 35 years.   Naturally, he urged me to continue to talk about this issue after November.  Dr, Paul is bright, humble, polite, and the epitome of a gentleman.

Why Should I Vote For Brian Brady for SDGOP Central Committee?

I received an email this morning, asking me these five questions about my motivation for serving and plans to grow the SDGOP.  I'm thrilled people are paying attention and asking the hard questions of candidates.  When voters ask the hard questions (and they are), we stand a better chance fo reclaiming and restoring the Republic. 

Questiones emboldened.  Answers italicized

1.      Can you tell me a little bit about yourself?

I am a husband, father, tea party activist, and small business owner who announced his candidacy for the San Diego County Republican Central Committee, on February 15, 2012.  My conservative activism began soon after I registered to vote in my hometown of Cherry Hill, NJ. On my 18th birthday, I registered with the Selective Service Board then went to Township Hall to register to vote.  Maria Greenwald, mayor of Cherry Hill, was horrified when Mr. Brady registered Republican in the mostly Democratic township.

I smiled, told Mayor Greenwald that I was going to get President Reagan re-elected, and walked out of the Township Hall.  I was immediately approached by a bystander who invited me to the Camden County Republican Party meeting that month.  At the meeting, I committed to become a County committeeman.  I launched my campaign in my District, won at age 18 and 3 months, and the journey began.

Read my full biography

2.      What are the duties and responsibilities of the central committee?

The Central Committee is the governing body of the San Diego County Republican Party and is tasked with recruiting and endorsing candidates, raising money for local races, registering voters, and working to keep Republicans as the majority party.

3.      Why do you want to be on the central committee?

I want to "Restore the GOP" to the majority party in San Diego County, the State of California, and the country.  I believe the best way to do that is to recommit our party to the principles of Liberty and fidelity to the Constitution.

Ourr Founders gave us a "manual for good self-government", also known as The Constitution.  That brilliant document guarantees individual, God-given rights.  Both parties have strayed from First Principles, finding it easier to promise the electorate stuff rather than to follow the constraints placed upon government in Article One, Section Eight.  Not since Reagan and Goldwater have we heard those principles effectively articulated.   I want to help to RESTORE the GOP to the platform of constitutionally constrained government, promotion of free enterprise, and protection of individual liberties.

Read the about my ideas to RESTORE THE GOP here

4.      What specific ideas do you have that will make the SDRP more robust
and successful in its mission to elect conservatives to public office?

Recruit and educate candidates who can effectively articulate why limiting government is legally, morally, and practically the best course of action.

Read those ideas here.

5.      Any ideas on how to attract youth/minorities to the party?

Promote Liberty.  Liberty has a way of bringing people together.  The principles of Liberty are attracted thousands of young people, of all races, colors and creeds, to rallies across California.

Here is what young people said at the linked story about a Liberty rally:

One group of six students, all from different backgrounds, shared two things: They were men, and they were there in support of Dr. Paul. They agreed that if Dr. Paul is not the nominee, they would still absolutely vote in the general election.

They would not stay home.

Most of the six young men said they would lean toward President Obama over Mitt Romney, in varying degrees. They all agreed that they could not support Rick Santorum. These young men were overall very thoughtful. They were worried about crushing debt.

Ron Paul is no Messiah but to ignore the principles he is promoting:  sound money, scaled back military intervention, reducing the size and scope of government, and fiscal resposnisbility, is to ignore the future voters of the GOP.  Voters under 30 can and will passionately support candidates who stand for these principles.  We have plenty of those candidates in San Diego and need to recruit and educate them.

Brady Campaign Endorsed By American Patriots Coalition

American Patriots Coalition PAC

Vista, California

April 29, 2012

Re: Brian Brady, 78th Assembly District Republican Central Committee 

Dear Mr. Brady:

The American Patriots Coalition PAC is pleased to encourage you to list our organization as one that supports your candidacy for the office of 78th Assembly District Republican Central Committee.  

As you know, we support pro-life, pro-family constitutional conservatives who believe in limited government and you have demonstrated your agreement with our principles. 

If you would like us to include contact information or a link your campaign website on our website (www.apcpac.org) please advise.

Thank you for your willingness to serve,

The American Patriots Coalition Endorsing Committee

Brady Campaign Makes National News

"Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who has said he’ll step down from office at year end, has inspired a crop of candidates who are running for office on his libertarian platform."--Bloomberg.BusinessWeek

This map shows that there are "different" types of Republican candidates who are running to steer the Republican Party back towards its traditional conservative message.    Brian Brady is one of three endorsed California candidates on the map.  I've net the other two candidates and, while we may differ slightly on how we present the issues, in the end, we each want to advance the principles of Liberty within the existing power structure. 

Talking Limited Government With The Coronado Republican Women's Federated

I had the distinct pleasure, of addressing the members of the Coronado RWF this week at a beautiful oceanfront home near the Naval base.  My topic was "Why we limit government".  My wife Debra and I were invited to become associate members of the Coronado RWF, after my address,  which we accepted with gratitude.

Mia Freymiller, a candidate for SDGOP Central Committee and Programs Chair introduced me.  Among the attendees were SDGOP Central Committee candidate and my good friend Eric Andersen, and Chairman of the San Diego Republican Party, Tony Krvaric.

Points I made were:

• The concept of a limited government, constrained by the Constitution, isn't novel nor outdated.  Senator Barry Goldwater laid out the framework for the modern restoration to limited government in his watershed work, Conscience of a Conservative.  President Reagan gave special notice to the concept of federalism in his 1981 Inaugual Address.  These men were not libertarians, they were conservative Republicans.  These men weren't "anti-government extremists", they were elected officials.
• American exceptionalism recognizes the concept of natural rights.  For the non-religious, this means that our rights pre-exist government because they are a product of our humanity.  Religious folks believe that we have rights, which can't be separated, as a gift from God. This made America uniquely good because we departed from our European cousins' belief that God make one man or woman a ruler over others.  In these United States, each Man is a King and each Woman is a Queen, but not a one of us is a Ruler.
• This belief makes our nation "exceptional".  Alexis de Tocqueville recognized that limited government unleased the goodness of Americans and that goodness made us great.  The result, as history has revealed, is an experiment which created the most wealth, for the most people, and meted out the most justice in the world, in the history of Man interacting with Man.
• For the well-intentioned but naive people who try to impose burdens on some, to bestow gifts to others, in pursuit of a Heaven on Earth, they are violating the First Commandment (or Laws of Nature for the non-religious).  Stated differently, while Man is made in the image and likeness of God, Man is NOT God,  God is perfect and Man is fallible.
• Since we recognize that Man is fallible, we recognize the empowering Man as a ruler is dangerous.  Lord Acton warned us that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".  We only need to look at the Soviet Union as an example of abslolute  and absolutely corrupted power.  Of course, that experiment, to create a "Soviet Heaven on Earth" , failed miserably.
• Our Constitution is a flawed but nearly perfect guideline for good government.  When we follow the constraints it placed upon the federal government, and all of the branches of government neither arrogate power from other branches, not abdicate power to the other branches, we handcuff government so that the power to rule over others is limited.
• Free citizens, left to their own devices, solve society's problems best through commerce, charity, volunteerism, and association with others.  Government distorts those solutions with forced, top-down approaches, inducing a sense of casual indifference towards society's problems from its citizens, and ultimately sufferes a collapse.
• It's not too late to fix what is broken.  If we return to First Principles, understand that our morality doesn't come from our laws rather our laws come from our morality, embrace the diverse solutions which different free citizens and citizens' groups attempt, we can restore the Republic.

When I finished my address, I enjoyed the fellowship of Senatorial candidiates Dan Hughes and John Boruff.  I had fun offering advice to improve upon Dan Hughes' "Bold Solutions Plan", with the principles from my speech.  I'm hopeful to see how if implements those ideas into his campaign

Liberty-Candidates.org Endorsement Questionnaire

I submitted a questionnaire to Liberty-Candidates.org.  Liberty-Candidates.org describes its mission as:

Liberty-Candidates.org is a not-for-profit, non-partisan organization formed to assist voters in finding candidates who will uphold the standards of Liberty in coming elections.

Our goal is to prevent any more RINOs and/or Teo-Cons from being in charge of our money and our freedoms!  Our mission is in sync with Campaign for Liberty from whence the Liberty Candidate questions evolved:

• Individual Liberty
• Sound Money
• Free Market
• Constitutional Government
• Non-interventionist Foreign Policy

Vetted candidiates, running for office in California, are here:

My answers to the questions are italicized:

I) The U.S. Financial System:

1. What is your view of the monetary system in the U.S. today?

Our monetary system has been ruined by fiat currency.  An activist Federal Reserve Bank, operating way beyond its mandate, prints money, stealing money from poor and middle-class people to prop up a failed financial system.  The result will be a currency collapse and/or runaway inflation.

1. What corrective actions could we take right now to improve the economy?

Audit the Federal Reserve Bank.  Repeal legal tender laws.  Permit competing currencies.  Reduce spending to target funding only the legitimate federal government functions, outlined in Article 1, Section 8 of the US Comstitution

1. Do you agree with the actions the Federal Reserve has taken to solve the financial crisis? If not, what could the Fed have done differently?

The Federal Reserve Bank could have acted as a "safe haven" for failed bank assets and auctioned off deposits, loan assets, and other assets to healthy financial institutions.  The Fed could have facilitated the speedy creation of new banks (to buy the surviving assets) by "fast-tracking" charters for newly-formed institutions.

1. Should the Federal Reserve be audited fully, no secrets, or does it need to keep some information under wraps?

A full audit is necessary with an eye towards shutting the Fed down.

II) Foreign Policy:

1. What is your opinion on current US foreign policy?

Our current foreign policy is an overreach and may be exposing us to new and unknown dangers.  We spend too much money abroad, have far too many foreign military installations, and are distorting the peace cause through our foreign aid.

1. How should we fight a “war on terror”?

We should be clear about our goals.  Eradicating terror is almost impossible but we can identify and target groups or individuals, who want to attack this nation, through the issuance of Letters of Marque and Reprisal.  We can be clear with our allies about the size, scope, and expectations of our military actions in their lands, execute those plans with the the goal of limiting Amwerican lives, and come home rather than to try to nation-build.

1. Should the U.S. occupy other countries? If not, would you push to close all bases? Are there any you would keep open?

I'm never comfortable with the word "occupy" inasmuch as this country has never acted like an imperial conquerer.  Still, however noble our intentions, our continued presence in foreign lands have the unintended consequence of "choosing sides" with one group of foreigners, to the detriment of others in that foreign land.  I would be more comfortable with a worldwide naval presence, in all seven seas, and with a reach all over the globe.  I would seek to close the majority of our foreign basesexcept for certain strategic naval bases.

1. Should the U.S. maintain its standing army?

I think a professional military service is essential to a strong national defense in today's world.  Still, I think active-duty personnel could be reduced to essential patrol functions with an expanded National Guard and Ready Reserve.

1. Is the Patriot Act necessary to protect America? If not, would you vote to repeal it?

Absolutely not.  Warrantless searches are completely illegal and invasive.  I would seek to repeal the PATRIOT Act completely but might want to see an expanded judiciary, to examine and authorize the increased demand for previous PATRIOT Act activities.  Gathering information on American citizens should be only done with indisputable evidence, reviewed by an independent judge, that the citizen is engaged in subversive activities.

III) Personal Liberty:

1. What information may the U.S. government legally gather about its citizens? When would it be necessary to overstep those boundaries?

If an independent judge, is presented with evidence of reasonable suspicion of treason against the United States, and issues an appropriate warrant, the US Government should seek to gather as much evidence as possible to protect lawful citizens against the actions of the traitor.  When enough evidence is gathered, to try that traitor, an arrest should be made and the traitor should be charged.

Absent a properly executed warrant, the US Government should contain its infromation gathering to the limits of the constitution; the census of how many adults and children live in each household.

1. What limits, if any, should be placed on the U.S. government’s ability to search its citizens without a warrant?

I am a strict originalist and as such believe that the 4th Amendment is inviolable.  However, if a peace officer has clear and present knowledge, that  a crime is being committed, and another citizen's life or liberty is in danger, that peace officer should act upon that knowledge to protect against  the aggression towards that citizen.  These actions should be the rare exception rather than the rule.  Acting without a duly signed warrant should place an onerous burden of proof, through cross examination, on that peace officer to justify the extraordinary action.

1. Ought the U.S. government be allowed to protect its citizens’ health by outlawing foods it considers unsafe, or to force medicate (i.e., fluoridation) or force vaccinate citizens?

I believe that we own are own bodies.  Our rights come from God and we are made in His image and likeness We are responsible to ourselves and Him only about what we ingest.  Free citizens should be able to make their own health and nutrition decisions with the understand that with their rights comes responibilities.  Stated differently, the government is forbidden to make such determinations.

1. What controls, if any, should be placed on the right to own a gun? Is there an effective way to keep guns out of the hands of madmen and criminals without encroaching on the rights of free, law-abiding citizens?

The 2nd Amendment is quite clear that the government can place no restrictions upon how we defend ourselves.  Felons abdicate that right and restrictions can be imposed upon them.  Restricting the mentally ill from self-defense is trickly because, if society restrcits that right, it assumes the responsibility to protect the mentally ill.  These restrictions should be done on a case-by-case basis with an eye towards the burden, those who can't defend themselves, might place upon society.

IV) Re. U.S. Sovereignty:

1. Is our involvement in and subjugation to global organizations, such as WHO (World Health Organization), NATO, the UN, etc., a benefit to U.S. citizens?

I don't think so.  I think any benefits we might derive are outweighed by any liabilities our membership imposes upon us.  Free citizens can decide to support those organizations individually if they choose but, our government should not cede sovereignty to any other group.

1. Would you work to repeal international agreements that purport to hold U.S. citizens and/or property under its jurisdiction, or do you think there might be times when benefits outweigh concessions?

I would work to repeal those agreements.  Our sovereignty is of utmost importance.

1. Are trade agreements with other nations, i.e., NAFTA, CAFTA, good for U.S. citizens?

Any encouragement of free trade is good.  The release of any restrictions, for ALL, citizens to freely trade, are good ideas.  Free trade agreements which grant favored status to some, while inhibiting others from trading, is not a good idea.

1. Should the U.S. give foreign aid to other countries? If yes, for what purposes would it be justified? If not all countries, which would you continue to support?

I would support an elimination of all foreign aid, to all nations.  Free citizens can donate their time or money to any nation unless it is engaged in war, or acts of war, against this country.

V) Re. State Sovereignty:

1. When does state law take precedent over federal law?

When the federal government operates outside of its contitutionally-authorized functions, state law should not only supercede an attempt by the federal government to arrogate power,  residents of that state are duty bound to resist that tyranny through a process called nullification.  If there is ambiguity about the federal government's authority, the 10th Amendment makes it quite clear that that authority resides with the States and People.

1. Would you stand up to the federal government and demand that it stay within the bounds of its enumerated powers and out of state business?

Absolutely and I seek to find candidiates who understand the concept of federalism and the nullification process.

1. Do federal officers have the right to arrest non-military citizens within the individual states for any crimes?

I think it's reasonable to expect a federal office to make an arrest within the states when: 

(1) probable cause exists to believe that a public offense, which poses an immediate to another citizens is being committed AND/OR  (2) when incidental to the performance of their federal duties as specified by a duly-sworn warrant by an independent judge.

VI) Illegal Immigration:

1. What do you see as the #1 problem with illegal immigration?

The welfare state is the biggest magnet for illegal immigration.  Eliminating or reducing the size and reach of the welfare state would solve most of our immigration problems.  Crime from illegal immigrants can't be ignored as a problem and just convictions should result in immediate deportation.  Serial offenses should result in lifelong incarceration.

1. What actions could we take to stop illegal immigrants from taking advantage of social services?

Eliminate the government run social services.  Absent that, if emergency services are given to illegal immigrants, deportation should be done as soon as possible.  Serial offenses should result in lifelong incarceration.

VII) Misc. Questions:

1. If you could make one amendment to the U.S. Constitution, what would it be?

Repeal the 17th Amendment.  Popular election of senators eliminated the States' representatives in Congress, encouraged a culture which "brings homes the bacon" rather than protecting individuals' rights, and reduced the power of state legislatures.

1. Would you vote to end government subsidies to private industry?

Immediately.  There is no legal nor moral authority for government to subsidize new businesses, bailout bad businesses, or pick winners over losers.

1. What should our government’s action be against Julian Assange, if any?

Nothing as it stands right now.  If Assange hacked into private or public property, or aided by way of funding the hackers, he should be tried and convicted of theft.

1. Do you know what Agenda 21/Sustainable Development and the Communitarian agenda is?

I am familiar with UN Agenda 21 and its attempts to relocate, through master zoning and land-use planning, citizens to urban areas and from rural lands, to control the population.

1. Do you support it? Why or why not?

I absolutely oppose Agenda 21.  This is a centralized planning scheme which violates the very American principle of private property rights.  The fact that it is being implemented, by local NGOs, at the behest of an international organization, amounnts to nothing less than treason.

 

Clairemont Candidate Forum

De Le, San Diego's "go-to" guy, invited me to participate in a candidate forum today.  I had an opportunity to share my vision about what I intend to do as a Member of the San Diego GOP Central Committee.  Here are the key points I made today:

• Our country, state, and city is in danger of an economic collapse
• Debt is driving this threat on all fronts
• We need to elect candidates who understand that 2+2= 4
• I care deeply about the fiscal issues and, the social issues will work out if we address the fiscal problems now
• I see my role as "guardian of the conservative culture".  I advanced that role with the The Promise to California Taxpayers
• When we act like us, we win.  When we act like them, we lose.

Many thanks to De for orgainzing this event.

Why TaxPayerPromise.org ?

Stop Taxing Us, the Carlsbad-based taxpayer advocacy group, has created a new tool for holding candidates and elected officials accountable to California taxpayers.  The Promise to California Taxpayers is a four-point pledge that commits signers to:

• oppose any and all efforts to increase marginal tax rates for individuals and/or businesses,
• oppose any and all efforts to amend and/or repeal Proposition 13,
• oppose any and all efforts to increase the taxpayers’ contribution to public employee retirement plans, and
• oppose all net reduction and elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

The Promise to California Taxpayers is absolutely voluntary.  "We intend to offer the Promise as a way for fiscal conservatives, regardless of party affiliation, to articulate clearly that raising taxes is something they will never, ever do.  We want to make it easy for candidates to tell the voters where they stand.  Additionally, we want California taxpayers to know which candidates protect them and, should the unfortunate happen...that is... if a candidate breaks his/her promise in office, we want to let the taxpayers know that their governing actions were inconsistent with their campaign rhetoric." said Brady

Engaging With OccupySD in Downtown San Diego

Last November, I accompanied Rhonda Deniston, to a Press Conference at the Occupy San Diego encampment.  Rhonda was denouncing the violence directed at her by the fringe element of the Occupy movement (see video here--NSFW).    Rhonda called a press conference and asked me to attend.  What I didn't expect was a full-blown news conference with 10-12 different media outets. 

The San Diego Union Tribune covered the press conference:

Surrounded by a group of Occupy San Diego protesters Tuesday, Brian Brady, another Oceanside Tea Party member, urged people in the two movements to focus on what they have in common, such as anger over bank bailouts, and denounce violence, such as that which was displayed against Deniston "by some of your fringe element."

"My suggestion to you is please police your movement ... like the Tea Party had to," Brady said.

Rhonda asked me to address the crowd (see video here--I come in about 4:20).  I tried to find common ground with the protesters about the bank bailouts (and did).  I spent approximately 40 minutes after the press conference engaging with the protesters.  I learned two things from that experience:

1. there are a lot of nice, idealistic, young people there who are despondent.
2. unions and the institutional left are organizing the movement.

All in all, it was a scary but good experience.  I was thankful the San Diego Police Department were near by, thankful that Jim Miller, Jr (candidiate for Superior Court Judge) was there, and VERY thanksful that I had a retired Marine at my flank, the whole time I was speaking.  There were absolutely no Republicans in this crowd but it was instructive to understand that the organized Left is exploiting well-intentioned people.  A few of the smart young people were asking lots of questions about the Federal Reserve Bank and how (and why) TARP was enacted.

Photo from OB Rag,  Photo credit Annie Lane