Greatest Hits: Liberty Deserves Better From Me

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Liberty Deserves Better From Me: John Carey made a rather strong point.

Note that this post was originally published in 1-9-13

On this day in 1776 Thomas Paine published his pamphlet “Common Sense.”  This 47-page pamphlet made the arguments in favor of American independence.  Mr. Paine’s use of plain language spoke to the common people of America. It was also the first published pamphlet that openly argued for independence.  The powerful words of Mr. Paine helped galvanize a movement that before Common Sense was published was a scattered grumbling at best.

Paine fundamentally changed the tenor of colonists’ argument with the crown when he wrote the following:  “Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America.  This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty from every part of Europe.  Hither they have fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster; and it is so far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home, pursues their descendants still.”

H/T History.com

The power of words.  We must remember this when writing our articles.  The power of words can unite or divide.  They can turn a mob into a movement.  They can restore a republic.  In the next four years we’re going to face some serious challenges as a nation.  We going to see our constitution ignored.  We’re going to see more liberties stripped away from us.  And we’re going to see our beloved America begin to unravel.  The power of words can turn this around.  Think about the letter that former U.S. Marine Joshua Boston wrote to Senator Feinstein and the power of his words.

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,

Joshua Boston

H/T Daily News

The words in this letter went viral because it resonated with people.  It not only challenged her perceived authority on this matter, but it highlighted her arrogance.  It reminded people who we were as a people.  This is the power of words and how it can change the narrative.  This letter put Senator Feinstein on the defense and made her look smaller in the eyes of many.  Each day we write and publish articles that cover a wide variety of topics.  We do our best with each topic, but do our words really resonate with the people?  Are they powerful and factually sound?  I believe in the power of words.  I believe that each of us are using words each day to try to save the republic.  We must be make sure our efforts are meaningful and our words resonate with the people.  We must like Thomas Paine use the power of words to ignite a movement to restore the republic.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post:  Sentry Journal

Share

Those Against Indiana’s Religious Freedom Law Are Either Ignorant Or Liars

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo freedom_of_religion_zpsxaldsbfq.jpg

Hat/Tip to Warner Todd Huston at Publius’ Forum.

Another outstanding Op-Ed from Warner Todd Huston, printed in its entirety.

I have to be straight forward right at the outset on this faux controversy over the new Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Those losing their tiny minds about it are either wholly ignorant of what is in the law, or know full well what is in it and are lying about the law in order to push their anti-Christian, gay-supporting agenda. There can be no other choice, here.

Firstly, before we even get to the case in Indiana, to act as if this whole idea is “new” is specious. Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRA) have been around since President Bill Clinton signed one in the 1990s.

The first such law was signed in 1993 by Bill Clinton and was passed unanimously by the House of Representatives where it was sponsored by no less than New York’s Chuck Schumer, now one of the farthest left Senators in Washington D.C.

Furthermore, 30 other states have RFRA laws just like Indiana’s or other laws that offer RFRA-like protections–including liberal states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington state, and Illinois.

In fact, 19 other states have laws almost exactly like the new Indiana law and no one is suddenly boycotting them. So, to act as if Indiana is alone, here, is a lie-based talking point.

Additionally, all the hysterical attacks from halfwitted liberals out there are not addressing a single thing in the bill but instead are making wild-eyed, spittle-specked assumptions that the bill somehow outlaws gays. So, here is the text of the Indiana bill in case you need to see it.

But the fact is, the new Indiana statute does not give anyone the license to discriminate against gays or anyone else for that matter. We already have federal laws that prevent such things and this law doesn’t make any attempts to overturn those protections.

Additionally, this law has nothing at all to do with how citizens interact with other citizens. This law addresses what government does to people with religious convictions. This law covers how government interacts with the people, not how the people interact with each other.

There are plenty of other laws that prevent discrimination and this RFRA law doesn’t do a single thing to upset them.

Yes, when all is said and done, if you are one of those running around vomiting all over yourself because of this law you are either an ignoramus who knows nothing at all about what he is talking about, or you are a liar using lies to push your gay agenda.

.

.

Share

Religious Liberty Dies in California, Churches are Forced to Pay for Elective Abortions

Share

 photo ReligiouslibertydiesinCaliforniachurchesareforcedtopayforelectiveabortions_zpsb027a569.jpg
 

Feminism’s holy sacrament of abortion will not be denied.

The California Department of Managed Health Care hath decreed that all employers, including churches, must pay for elective abortions in their health insurance plans.

A coalition of pro-life groups is challenging the mandate.

A campaign against the state of California mandating abortion coverage in insurance plans is intensifying. Several complaints have been filed with the federal government to keep it from violating what Christian legal groups consider American’s fundamental rights and go against their religiously held beliefs and conscience.

The Department of Managed Health Care has ordered all employers, including churches and other religious organizations such as colleges and universities, to pay for elective abortions in their plans.

Alliance Defending Freedom and Life Legal Defense Foundation are representing seven California churches who object to the coverage, alleging the mandate violates federal law. One of the churches being represented is Dr. Jim Garlow’s Skyline Church in San Diego, which does not want be forced into funding the practice of abortion through its health care coverage.

Casey Mattox, an attorney with the Christian legal group, Alliance Defending Freedom, argues that the Golden State has gone too far by trouncing the liberties that they hold dear.

“Forcing a church to be party to elective abortion is one of the most unimaginable assaults on our most fundamental American freedoms,” Mattox asserts.

Mattox argues that there is no way California should be allowed to bypass federal law and end up getting away with forcing churches to fund a practice that the Bible specifically teaches against.

Christianity is under attack by a tyranny more insidious than anything George III could have dreamed of. Homofascists now demand church-sanctioned “weddings.” HHS mandates coverage for contraceptives, abortifascients, and sterlizations. And here the State of California goes one better, requiring their 30 pieces of silver for infanticide.

Appealing to Obama’s HHS is pointless. They’re obviously delighted with California’s regulations, and their only question is how to extend mandatory elective abortion coverage to all 57 states.

Religious liberty’s only hope lies with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Alas, given SCOTUS’ recent abominable 6-3 decision against Texas abortion law in Whole Woman’s Health v Lakey, it appears that both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy have gone over to the Dark Side. They’re apparently reluctant to place any “undo burden” on a woman’s “right” to murder her unborn child.

I can easily see them agreeing that paying for her own abortion is indeed an “undo burden.”

America has lost her moral compass. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us.

According to this analysis, “the law” is on California’s side.

First, the California abortion mandate is a law of general applicability. This means no violation of the First Amendment: Under U.S. Supreme Court precedent, religious freedom doesn’t matter.

But Hobby Lobby! Nope. HL is a limited cased based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The RFRA only applies to federal law, not state.

Since California could care less about religious freedom, we don’t have an RFRA-type law.

But Obamacare forbids states from discriminating against policies that don’t provide abortion coverage. True. Alliance Defending Freedom and Life Legal Defense Foundation are on the case.

Go get them, guys, but as the story says, good luck with that.

The Obama Administration is pro-abortion. More, it has amply demonstrated it won’t enforce laws or regulations with which it disagrees. Thus, I would be very surprised if Obamacarians brought its fellow ideological travelers in California to heel.

So sue! Sure. But I have two words for you: “Ninth Circuit.”

Bottom line: California has crossed the post-Christian bridge into the anti-Christian era.

The Obama Administration has too.

So have most courts, particularly the Ninth Circuit.

I don’t expect these churches to find legal relief short of the Supreme Court. And that will take years.

Ugh.

So I say, “disobey.” Refuse to offer abortion coverage.

Dare California to put ministers and priests in jail.

We are all martyrs for Christ. Let us be martyrs for the unborn too.

.

.

.

Share

The Declaration of Independence: As Relevant Today as it was in 1776

Share

Note: This was originally posted on July 4, 2009.

It’s Independence Day. I wish you all a great day, and ask you to contemplate the meaning of the holiday. To assist, here is a transcript of the Declaration of Independence.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

  • He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  • He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
  • He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
  • He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  • He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  • He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  • He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
  • He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
  • He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
  • He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
  • He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
  • He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
  • He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
  • For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
  • For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
  • For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
  • For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
  • For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  • For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
  • For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
  • For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
  • For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  • He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  • He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  • He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  • He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  • He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

This document speaks to us through the centuries. It is just as relevant today as it was in 1776. Will we ignore it? Will we give up what has been bequeathed to us? Who will stand up to the current leaders that usurp out rights? That remains to be seen.

Share

Tyranny is the type of government our founders rejected

Share

We need to get back to the basics as a people.  With all the scandals, corruption, attacks on our gun rights, attacks on our free speech, attacks on our faith, ignoring the constitution, crushing taxes, usurpations of states rights, suffocating regulations, and government using its institutions to threaten and impose its will on the people we need to find our way back to liberty and reject tyranny.  Take a good look, because this is what a soft tyranny looks like and we own it!.  This is the type of government our Founding Fathers rejected and we too should reject it.  236 years ago our founders stood against the type of despotic government we have today and eloquently listed their grievances against the Crown in the Declaration of Independence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security…

To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

  • He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  • He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
  • He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
  • He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  • He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  • He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  • He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
  • He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
  • He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
  • He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
  • He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
  • He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
  • He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
  • For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
  • For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
  • For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
  • For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
  • For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  • For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
  • For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
  • For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
  • For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  • He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  • He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  • He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  • He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  • He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

You’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.  –President Barack Hussein Obama, Ohio State University commencement speech, May 2013

Are you tracking with me.  Tyranny is tyranny no matter how you slice it and no matter who tries to put a smiley face on it.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!
Original Post: The Sentry Journal

Share

Man is Born Free, and Everywhere He is in Chains… Let’s Break the Chains and Be Great Again

Share

As I sat at a local government meeting recently, I was struck by how amazing people are and therefore why it is so wrong for other people to make decisions for them regarding their lives or property. Man (and woman) are amazing creatures- when free.

“Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains,” or so said Jean-Jacques Rousseau, but I think I might modify this statement to say “Man is born free and is amazing, but everywhere he has been chained by government.”

Too many people believe that the goal of government is to make people better- but I reject this because I believe that people are already made by their Creator as great as they are ever going to be. When born, we all are free individuals, making free choices, respecting the lives of others, and understanding basic ideas about ownership of property (ever heard a kid say ‘that’s mine!’). When left alone, free to make choices about what to do and what to do with their labor and what to do with their own property, people make amazing decisions and become amazing people.

At my local government meeting- the sort of meeting that is held in every city and every county and every state capital every month- we have honored businessmen, journalists, charitable people, sports champions, and many others who do great things with their lives, liberty, and property. This, I believe, is not unique to my experience alone- there are lots of great and amazing people out there, everywhere in every nation, because God has made us great.

But what happens is that other people begin to gain power and control over their fellow man, believing that in their infinite greatness and amazingness that they are better than other people and better and more empowered to make decisions over these lesser people’s lives and property. Whether because of their history, their skin color, their connections to money or force- these people have deluded themselves into thinking that they are better at making decisions about someones life and property than the other person.

The purpose of government is not to make me better, to make decisions for me, to control my labor, or to take the fruits of my labor and distribute them to others- the purpose of the government is only to get out of my way and protect my own innate God-given abilities to keep and earn property, to make decisions, and to live.

Government- get out of the way of greatness! People- stop putting chains on your fellow man and holding them back! Republicans and Democrats- stop using the force of the state to restrict my personal decisions regarding my own life and property!

This is not just rhetoric- these are the principles which lead to proper policy decisions. Tax rates should be lower and equal for everyone, whether that is a flat income tax at the national level or a sales tax at the state level. Charity should be provided by private institutions and private individuals, instead of having the government inefficiently run food stamp programs and other charity programs that are rife with fraud and corruption. Guns should be free to be bought- or not bought- by free people making free decisions, and those who use guns to take property or life or liberty should face harsh judgement. Those who violate the life, liberty, or property of others should be removed from society (sent to jail) until they learn and believe in these concepts, and not just released after an arbitrary amount of time (usually early). People should be able to build a building or expand their business free from government interference. Automakers should not be told what sort of cars they must build and individuals should not be told what sort of cars they must buy- rather free people making free decisions should be empowered in the process and the government should work to protect that freedom and liberty and property from danger from others within (criminals) or without (foreign invasion).

Real policy decisions- good policy decisions- flow from knowing and understanding and believing in the greatness of people. We need to unleash the greatness of people once more, and stop putting them in chains of laws and regulations and slavery (making someone work against their will for others). Let’s make man free again and throw off the chains to which Obama and the Democrats and Republicans would bind us! Let us here and now tell our enemies that they may take our lives and they make take our property but they’ll never take OUR FREEDOM!

Original Post: A Conservative Teacher

Share

The power of words: Common Sense

Share

founding-fathershistoryheritage

Note that this post was originally published in 1-9-13

On this day in 1776 Thomas Paine published his pamphlet “Common Sense.”  This 47-page pamphlet made the arguments in favor of American independence.  Mr. Paine’s use of plain language spoke to the common people of America. It was also the first published pamphlet that openly argued for independence.  The powerful words of Mr. Paine helped galvanize a movement that before Common Sense was published was a scattered grumbling at best.

Paine fundamentally changed the tenor of colonists’ argument with the crown when he wrote the following:  “Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America.  This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty from every part of Europe.  Hither they have fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster; and it is so far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home, pursues their descendants still.”

H/T History.com

The power of words.  We must remember this when writing our articles.  The power of words can unite or divide.  They can turn a mob into a movement.  They can restore a republic.  In the next four years we’re going to face some serious challenges as a nation.  We going to see our constitution ignored.  We’re going to see more liberties stripped away from us.  And we’re going to see our beloved America begin to unravel.  The power of words can turn this around.  Think about the letter that former U.S. Marine Joshua Boston wrote to Senator Feinstein and the power of his words.

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,

Joshua Boston

H/T Daily News

The words in this letter went viral because it resonated with people.  It not only challenged her perceived authority on this matter, but it highlighted her arrogance.  It reminded people who we were as a people.  This is the power of words and how it can change the narrative.  This letter put Senator Feinstein on the defense and made her look smaller in the eyes of many.  Each day we write and publish articles that cover a wide variety of topics.  We do our best with each topic, but do our words really resonate with the people?  Are they powerful and factually sound?  I believe in the power of words.  I believe that each of us are using words each day to try to save the republic.  We must be make sure our efforts are meaningful and our words resonate with the people.  We must like Thomas Paine use the power of words to ignite a movement to restore the republic.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post:  Sentry Journal

Share

No more playing nice in the defense of liberty and freedom

Share

Unlike most conservatives and tea party patriots, I liked the tax deal- because I thought it was a good first step. Now that tax rates for some of us have been permanently frozen at the lower rate, our elected leaders can go about working to get the tax rates for the rest back to the lower level that they were at for a decade, and lower them for the everyone else. Now is the time to keep fighting to lower taxes and push for everyone- poor and rich, liberal and conservative, black and white, man and women- to have lower taxes, and that’s a winning message that will also be good policy. But this means that the Republicans are going to have to stop being so darned ‘nice’ in fighting to protect our life, liberty, and property from those who would limit them or take them from us.

The problem though is that the Republicans apparently think that if they are nice to liberals than the liberals will meet them halfway on issues and that voters will reward them for being nice by electing them back to office. But over the last few years the evidence overwhelmingly points against this.

Republicans, conservatives, tea party patriots, progressive fascists, liberals, and Democrats all win elected office and win passage of their policies when they DO NOT PLAY NICE, and the historical record bears this out.

The only reason why the Democrats and progressive fascists came to the table and agreed to the tax deal was because the Republicans and conservatives were threatening not to play nice- the revolts in the House and noise coming from the Senate all made it clear that we were prepared to fight mean and dirty, and that forced the deal. When the GOP signalled its intentions to not play nice, then liberals came to the negotiating table, and crafted their proposals based on just exactly how much niceness they thought they could take advantage of.

The GOP and conservatives began to fight firmly and strongly against the unserious nomination that Obama was preparing to make of Susan Rice for Secretary of State, in spite of attacks that opposing her were racist and that the GOP should just roll over and let the President nominate who he wants. Playing nice and going along to get along do not result in Obama nominating more qualified and moderate candidates or voters rewarding the GOP with support- only fighting strong and hard for conservative values will do those things.

After the Presidential election, Thomas Sowell blamed Romney’s loss on being nice:

Mitt Romney now joins the long list of the kinds of presidential candidates favored by the Republican establishment– nice, moderate losers, people with no coherently articulated vision, despite how many ad hoc talking points they may have….

…Bush 41 first succeeded when he ran for election as if he were another Ronald Reagan (“Read my lips, no new taxes”), but then lost when he ran for reelection as himself– “kinder and gentler,” disdainful of “the vision thing” and looking at his watch during a debate, when he should have been counter-attacking against the foolish things being said.

This year, Barack Obama had the hard-hitting specifics– such as ending “tax cuts for the rich” who should pay “their fair share,” government “investing” in “the industries of the future” and the like. He had a coherent vision, however warped…

…In this year’s first presidential debate, Obama out-niced Romney. But, when he lost out doing that, he then reversed himself, became the attacker, and ultimately the winner on election night, despite a track record that should have buried him in a landslide…

Sowell was right- Romney lost because he was just too nice. I was one of the few bloggers to say immediately after the third debate that Romney had lost the election, and he lost it because he was just too nice and Obama was not. Being nice in politics is not rewarded- and this is as it should be, because most people are not looking for someone to go along to get along but rather for someone who fights hard and dirty to advance a certain agenda.

Liberals love Obama because he isn’t nice- they like the fact that he is a lying, back-stabbing, cheating, dirty, personal-attack launching SOB. And maybe they should love him for this, because this means that Obama is willing to do whatever it takes to advance the values and views of fascists, communists, progressives, and liberals, and doesn’t care who it pisses off. He is going to encourage abortion, control your choices on a range of subjects, lock you into the lower class, take your property from you, and he isn’t going to worry about being nice when doing it.

Because at the heart of it, President Obama is a bully and you don’t fight back against a bully by being nice. And modern day liberalism, just like any sort of tyrannical spirit throughout history, is an ideology which bullies people and removes choice and property from them instead of empowering them with more choices and the ability to earn more property.

Ben Shapiro, editor for Breitbart who is promoting his latest book, wrote:

…the American left has become the greatest purveyor of bullying during the last half-century. That’s the dirty little secret: buried beneath all of the left’s supposed hatred for bullying is a passionate love for bullying—the use of power to force those who disagree to shut up, back down, or face crushing consequences up to and including loss of reputation, career destruction, and even death…

…The left’s goal is to shut down the political debate by decrying their opponents as victimizers. They label their opponents racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, benighted, backwards bitter clingers. They liken them to Nazis, KKK members, terrorists. Then they cast them out like lepers from the political debate. Because who would bother debating a Nazi, or a KKK member, or a terrorist?
This is how the left wins arguments. They polarize Americans from each other. They separate us by groups. They divide us, and they conquer us. They convince us that we’re either victims who deserve recompense or oppressors who must bow to the yoke….

…This is not only how the left wins arguments. It’s how they win elections. They don’t win by offering more convincing policy proposals based on evidence. They win by impugning the motives of their political opposition…

Ben Shapiro, like Thomas Sowell and myself, knows that the modern day left is not nice- and maybe we shouldn’t be so nice either. I’m not saying that tea party patriots and conservatives should sink to their level, but neither should we be happy with compromises or expect good faith in negotiations or take the personal attacks without fighting back hard.

In the second debate during the last President election, when Obama lied, Romney rightly called him out, but then he just sat there and when the moderator lied, letting the lie stand because he wanted to be nice and not confront the biased moderator. It was a lie that she uttered, it was a lie that she was a ‘moderator’, and Romney should not have been nice in pointing out the truth in those matters. In that moment of niceness he lost the election.

No more playing nice in the defense of liberty and freedom.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Share

Whittle on Virtue and Self Regulation

Share

Kindly take a look at this video on Virtue and Self Regulation.

That’s the main point of our culture war.  If you tear away virtue, as the Cultural Marxists have so successfully done, society begins to crumble.  The family has suffered.  Children grow up without parents, or stable families.  Children have suffered, and have created successive generations of other suffering children.  Or, we simply kill the children if they are too inconvenient.  Violence and crime have increased.  Society celebrates death and destruction.  These are the products of cultural Marxism.

Now, we see, in the attacks on Christianity, the plans come to fruition.  To destroy society, the left needs to destroy virtue, and the liberty it goes along with it.  It must be ridiculed, smeared, and penalized whenever possible.  For, you see, a virtuous person has no need for the nanny state, and will resist it.  Also, since their obedience goes to God, and not the state, the leftist has little use or tolerance for a good man or woman.

H/T: The Rainey View

Share

Restoring Liberty Should be Our Number One Priority

Share

During the recent election most people listed the economy as their number one concern and that it should be a top priority for the next administration.  The reason people prioritize the economy as their main concern is because they can feel it.  Like the nauseating smell of cigarettes smoke, people feel the negative effects of a faltering economy.   It has an immediate and direct impact on their lives and impedes their ability to pursue happiness because there is little to no opportunity.  So it’s a natural thing for people to desire stronger economic conditions because it creates an opportunity rich environment. It establishes a basis for financial and economic security.  And it enhances and improves the individual condition.  If only people would connect the dots and realize that liberty is the foundation that economic freedom is built on.

The problem is most people do not understand the relationship between liberty and economic freedom.  This is why we tend to ask all the wrong questions to our candidates when they’re running for office.  The first thing we want to know is what they’re going to do to create jobs and boost the economy.  This is the wrong question.  We should be asking what they will do to restore liberty.  The truth is unless the candidates we support take steps to strip away the regulations that have restricted the liberties of the individual and small businesses we will not see the robust recovery we so desire.  Liberty is the foundation that creates economic freedom leading to job growth and prosperity.  So restoring liberty should be our number one priority.  But again for some strange reason people can’t wrap their brains around this relatively simple concept.   Perhaps the reason is because many view the two as separate issues; but they are not.  Using mathematical terms economic freedom and liberty are directly proportional.

As our economic freedom increases, so do our liberties.  As economic freedom decreases our liberties decrease.  It’s that simple.  Still so many look towards an all-powerful government to solve their problems.  They look for candidates who make empty promises about creating jobs yet in end will do nothing to restore liberties because they’re in the pocket of some special interest group that helped write the liberty stealing regulations to put their competitor out of business.  North Dakota is not experiencing an economic boom because of the discovery of oil in the Bakken Oil Fields.  North Dakota is experiencing its economic boom because of less regulation.  Fewer regulations mean more liberties and more liberties leads to economic freedom and prosperity.  This is the secret behind North Dakota’s success and why they have set up safe guards to thwart any attempt by the federal government to regulate oil operations on private property.  Once again there is no secret formula or hidden code to create the conditions that will lead to economic prosperity.  It all has to with restoring liberty.  And before this happens on a national level, it must first occur on the state level.

This in my opinion is where we must focus our efforts the next few election cycles.  There is no political solution for our economic woes that will come out of Washington.  The solutions to our problems are closer to home in local politics.  Once we turn it around at the state level, the national will follow.  The reason I say this is because all of those who represent us on the national level are grown at the state level.  Start electing local candidates who promote the restoration of liberty as their number one priority and everything will change.  The constitution will become the law of the land again.  States will begin to push back against their federal masters and federalism will be restored.  Economic prosperity will return.  And America will once again become a beacon to the world.

LIBERTY forever, freedom for all.

Share

Has America Passed the Point of No Return (ie, 50.1%+ Dependency on Government)?

Share

Here is an eye-opening article from the normally even keeled John Hinderaker over at Powerline blog- title of post was Why Is This Election Close?:

For a long time I have been predicting that Mitt Romney would get the Republican nomination, and that he would then win the general election. I have said that the election will be reasonably close–demographic realities dictate that all national elections will be reasonably close, for the foreseeable future–but not a squeaker; more like 2004 than 2000. Given President Obama’s dismal record, that seemed like a safe prediction.

But it now appears that the election will be very close after all, and that Obama might even win it. It will require a few more days to assess the effects (if any) of the parties’ two conventions, but for now it looks as though the Democrats emerged with at least a draw, despite a convention that was in some ways a fiasco. In today’s Rasmussen survey, Obama has regained a two point lead over Romney, 46%-44%….

…On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans. Why isn’t it? I am afraid the answer may be that the country is closer to the point of no return than most of us believed. With over 100 million Americans receiving federal welfare benefits, millions more going on Social Security disability, and many millions on top of that living on entitlement programs–not to mention enormous numbers of public employees–we may have gotten to the point where the government economy is more important, in the short term, than the real economy. My father, the least cynical of men, used to quote a political philosopher to the effect that democracy will work until people figure out they can vote themselves money. I fear that time may have come….

…I am afraid the problem in this year’s race is economic self-interest: we are perilously close to the point where 50% of our population cares more about the money it gets (or expects to get) from government than about the well-being of the nation as a whole. Throw in a few confused students, pro-abortion fanatics, etc., and you have a Democratic majority.

Maybe this anxiety is misplaced. President Obama has never been able to rise above 47% support in the polls, and perhaps when November comes undecided voters will break against the incumbent, as the conventional wisdom has it. Maybe the election won’t be so close after all. We’d all better hope so. Because, given the rate at which Democrats are frantically adding to the dependency state, another four years of Obama may be enough to tip the balance between the private sector and government dependence once and for all.

This sort of post sort of rattled me- it’s a scary idea to think about, that we have passed the point of no return and now more people depend on the government than depend on themselves. Once we pass that point, the end of liberty and freedom and private property protection will come faster and faster and the mob demands that the fewer work harder and harder to provide for them.

A couple months ago I laid out three possible futures for America– I still wonder what path we are on and what path my children and grandchildren will take.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Share

Liberty deserves better from me

Share

As a conservative I’m fighting each day to restore the constitutional republic our founding fathers gave us.  My weapon in this fight is the words that I use in the articles I write.  After all this an ideological war, one that pits two very different views about the role government should play in our lives.  It’s a topic that has been debated since the founding of our great nation.  Great minds like James Madison and Patrick Henry had two very different views on the role government should play in our lives and they matched wits against each other during the Virginia ratifying convention in 1788.  Both men were Patriots and both men were concerned with securing the rights of the individual.  They just had different ideas on the best method to use to secure those rights.

James Madison believed government should play a stronger role in our lives and therefore pressed for the ratification of the constitution.  He believed that without the constitution the union would eventually unravel and come apart.  He was a Federalist and one of the chief architects of the constitution.  Patrick Henry on the other hand believed the constitution was too vague and that there would come a time when men who were not the same caliber in terms of the character of the founders would twist and distort the constitution to expand their power at the expense of liberty.  Mr. Henry believed the states were sovereign entities that were more than capable in securing the rights of the people and that an all-powerful central government was not needed.  Two opposing views desiring to achieve the same goal; the securing of individual rights.  Mr. Henry was an anti-Federalist.  Some of the best arguments for both sides of the debate occurred between these two men during the Virginia ratifying convention.  You can read more about the debate here.

Even though both men philosophically opposed each other they also had respect for one another.  They were cordial to each other and did not call each other names because they disagreed.  Each man presented their arguments in support or opposition to the constitution to the Virginia Assembly.  For both men the cause for liberty was greater than themselves so they chose their words carefully when they spoke.

The other day I wrote an article Why I didn’t watch President Obama’s acceptance speech and in that article I used the term Kool-Aid drinkers.  When my wife read the article she said she liked everything about it except when I called Obama supporters Kool-Aid drinkers.  She asked how do you expect to win over the hearts and minds of people when you resort to the same tactics the left uses.  She said you’re smarter and better than that honey.  At the time I really didn’t take her words to heart.  I didn’t think calling Obama supporters Kool-Aid drinkers was that big of a deal.  That changed when my wife shared the article on her facebook page and one of her friends responded with the following:

The kool-aid drinkers and the ignorant….nice one! I can respect the fact that people have different political views than mine, I have no respect for the people who resort to degrading and belittling the people who don’t agree with them!! While it is quite despicable, it’s eye-opening at the same time…this country still has a long way to go!!!

My first reaction was who does this person think she is, lecturing me about civility and name calling.  After all the left labels me and calls me racist, Nazi, and extremist so why not push back.  And I said as much in my response.

I respect your opinion and this by no means is a knock against you personally. In regards to trying to weed out name calling and intolerance you need to look no further than the people who claim to be so tolerant of all…the left. People on the left who claim to be so tolerant are actually intolerant of my beliefs just because I refuse to blindly submit to an ideology that has failed over and over again throughout history. They’re the ones calling me a racist, a Nazi, an extremist because I believe in the individual and liberty and reject collectivism. They’re the ones calling me extreme because I believe we should restore the law of the land that is our constitution. I really don’t need to be lectured by people who are intolerant of me because of my beliefs and who have a great deal of contempt for our founding principles that promote individual liberties. You’re right we have a long way to go, and perhaps I could have taken the high road and dropped the name calling, but I felt I needed to push back with the same tactics used against me from the left.

After I posted my response my wife looked at me and said, “You’re missing the point.”  I responded by telling her that I’m not going to be ridiculed for what I believe and I’m certainly not going to stand for being lectured by someone who throws their lot in with the people who label me.  She smiled and said, “Babe you already have the winning argument, how is name calling going to add value to it.”  The more I thought about it the more I began to understand what she was saying.  The case for liberty is a winning argument no matter what political party you claim.  And each day we fight, we fight for the liberty we once had as a people.  This cause for liberty is bigger than us and it deserves better than petty name calling or the labeling of people.  We have a responsibility to frame it in the correct context to advance it for all Americans.  Resorting to name calling tactics takes away from the message we’re trying to convey and in this case actually became a barrier against effective communication.

Ronald Reagan was a rock solid conservative who embarked on a journey to advance the cause of liberty in America.  He didn’t advance it by labeling or calling his opponents names.  He advanced it by making the case for liberty through his words and actions and because of this he smashed down the barriers political parties had erected.  A large number of Democrats received his message and crossed over the political divide to support his candidacy in 1980 and his reelection in 1984.  They didn’t cross over because he was a great speaker or because of name recognition.  They crossed over because he made the case for liberty and economic freedom.  So from this point forward I will choose my words carefully.  I will no longer use labels like Kool-Aid drinkers or Obamabots.  I will advance the cause of liberty by making the argument that individual liberty is last best hope for America and I will take this charge seriously.

We can disagree with the left on the role government should play in our lives.  But we’re going to lose this ideological war if we can’t sell the case for liberty.  And when we stoop to their level and name call we shut down the lines of communication and greatly reduce the chance for liberty to be advanced.  The cause for liberty deserves better from me.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal

Share

Are you a staunch defender of liberty?

Share

Sentry Journal had a good post the other day that got me thinking- are there any real difference today between the Obama-led Democratic Party and the Tories of colonial times?

…You see the actions of our elected representatives are in complete contrast of the actions these men took 236 years ago. Our elected representatives to include the President are the kind of ilk our founders were declaring independence from. We’re living with the same type tyrannical forces that were oppressing the rights of the colonists in the 1770s. Our government confiscates our property through taxation, they overregulate our free market, they can now hold our citizens indefinitely without due process, and the TSA can conduct illegal searches and seizures in violation of the 4th amendment. They are now planning on fly drones over our heads to spy on us. Our government is attempting to manage every aspect of our lives and the officials who we elect to represent our views are allowing it to happen. Now compare all this anti-liberty actions that are being imposed on the American people every day to the actions the British imposed on the colonists. I say we’re far worse off today than the colonists were in 1776.

There is not an ounce of courage left in D.C. these days to promote the cause our founders put their lives on the line to secure. And the reason for this is because we no longer elect liberty loving, virtuous people into office…

… Are they staunch defenders of liberty? Would they be willing to pledge their lives and fortunes for it? The answer is no. These are the kind of people are founders opposed. These people are the modern day equivalent to the Loyalist or Tories of colonial times. They were loyal to the crown of England and stood against the men who signed the declaration. They stood against liberty and freedom. They even took up arms against the Patriots in the name of King George. They used some of the vilest of tactics to discredit the movement for liberty and freedom….

Are you a staunch defender of liberty?

This is an important question that our Founding Fathers answered and that needs to be asked of all our elected officials today. Given the option of governing us (perhaps in their own mind better than we govern ourselves) or given the option of letting us be free to make our own choices, which would an elected official choose? Given the option of levying a tax on us to raise money for some project that the elected official (or king) believes is important or letting the people keep their money and do with it as they wish, what option would the elected official choose? Given the option of disarming common people and stationing troops among them (supposedly for their own protection) or having common people arm themselves and protect themselves, which option would the elected official choose? Does the elected official believe that some people are better than other people, or do they believe that all men are equal and free?

These questions are the very questions that were asked our Founding Fathers in 1776, and they wrestled mightily with the answers before putting their names to a piece of paper that declared to everyone that people are, and of right ought to be, free and independent, that the purpose of government is simply to protect god-given natural rights, and that these rights are the right to live, the right to freedom and liberty, and the right to keep and earn property. Our nation was born from these glorious and eternal truths- I wonder today if the Obama-Democrats believe in these any more?

UPDATE: Welcome readers from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Systems, who have been lately visiting my blog! Although it does make me curious as to why you are reading blog posts on my site during company time from taxpayer computers, I am sure you are just trying to gain some insight into the foes of tyranny that seek to do America harm, so it’s probably all good. If I can be of any help fighting terrorism, enforcing the law, tracking stolen property, or exposing criminal organizations, please don’t hesitate to contact me directly.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Share

The Declaration of Independence: As Relevant Today as it was in 1776

Share

Note: This was originally posted on July 4, 2009.

It’s Independence Day.  I wish you all a great day, and ask you to contemplate the meaning of the holiday.  To assist, here is a transcript of the Declaration of Independence.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

  • He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  • He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
  • He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
  • He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  • He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  • He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  • He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
  • He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
  • He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
  • He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
  • He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
  • He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
  • He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
  • For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
  • For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
  • For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
  • For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
  • For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  • For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
  • For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
  • For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
  • For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  • He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  • He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  • He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  • He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  • He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

This document speaks to us through the centuries.  It is just as relevant today as it was in 1776.  Will we ignore it?  Will we give up what has been bequeathed to us?  Who will stand up to the current leaders that usurp out rights?  That remains to be seen.

Share

Conservatives Sabotaging Conservatism

Share

I took a few days off after our primary this past Tuesday to digest the results.  Two very conservative measures were voted down in what’s supposed to be one of the most conservative states in the union.  One measure provided an avenue for people to unshackle themselves from the bonds of property taxes while the other measure reinforced religious freedom on a state level.  Both measures had everything to do with conservatism; liberty and smaller government in our lives and both failed to pass by overwhelming margins.  I wasn’t surprised that both measures were voted down.  I saw it coming with all the money being poured into the anti measure campaign from largely progressive left groups.  The most disturbing part of all was that there were a large number of influential Republicans to include the governor who sided with these progressive groups in making sure both measures failed to pass.

Both groups worked together and successfully orchestrated a campaign of misinformation and outright lies scaring the voters into believing that all would be lost if they voted to support both measures.  Convincing them that property taxes were a good thing and the government being able to override their religious freedoms in regards to healthcare issues were ok.  The Republicans for their part sold a brand a conservatism that has very little to do with true conservatism.  They painted an image of those who supported such ideas as extreme; conservatives eating conservatives.  We didn’t need the left’s influence and money to sway the voter; there were plenty of phony conservatives who gladly carried the water for them.   But the real problem I see is the Republican establishment has managed to create this narrative that if you’re for liberty, if you’re for reestablishing the constitution as the law of the land, if you talk about the founders and unalienable rights beyond token talking points you are somehow extreme.

You are somehow extreme if you believe in limited government and less regulation.  You’re extreme if you believe in the free markets.  You’re extreme if you want to reform or eliminate unconstitutional entitlement programs.  You’re extreme if you want to end the FED and reestablish the gold standard.  You’re extreme if you want sound monetary policies.  You’re extreme if you go against the current climate in Washington D.C.  No matter what liberty loving position you take, you’re extreme and should be shunned in this brave new world where political mediocrity is the norm.  And this is exactly the mindset I discovered in many people when I was talking to them about both measures on the North Dakota ballot.

They felt that completely eliminating property taxes was an extreme position to take.  One person even said that measure two was being promoted by a bunch of right wing nut jobs.   They felt that voting for a measure that reinforced the rights of religious freedom on a state level was far too extreme.  I heard statements like, “Why do we even need additional measures at the state level when it’s already a right protected by the constitution?”  My answer was swift and simple, “because the constitution pertains to the things the federal government cannot do to you; this is at the state level.”  It didn’t matter.  The extremist picture was already painted by the establishment Republicans they trusted.  Even when I used words like leftist or progressive one person told me I sounded like one of those right wing extremists.  They said they instantly tuned me out when I used those “flag” words.  Even my own wife said it’s a bit of a turn off when she hears me use words like socialist or communist.

So apparently the new conservative narrative is that anyone who believes in liberty, free markets, limited government and reestablishing the constitution is far too extreme to be conservative.  They belong on the fringe edges of political ideology.  Their views should be viewed as dangerous to the current establishment and they should be discredited at every opportunity.  This is the new reality true conservatives live in; conservatives sabotaging conservatism.  It’s a problem that runs deeper than identifying someone as a RINO or being part of the Republican establishment.  It’s poisoning the waters of true conservatism and shifting the conversation to left.  It’s manipulating conservative voters to vote against conservative ideas by labeling the ideas as extreme.  At least we see it coming from the left.  We know the left wants big government and believes in big government solutions.  Those on the right embracing the same ideals are much more dangerous for conservatism because many are influential conservatives who are trusted by their conservative constituents.

Our toughest opposition to conservatism can be found with our own conservative leaders.  I know many true conservatives already know this.  The Tea Party movement is doing their part in trying to clean out some of these big government conservatives from the conservative ranks; but there is much work to do.  North Dakota’s ballot initiatives illustrate an example of conservatives not acting in a very conservative manner.  This needs to change and it starts at the grassroots level.  This means talking and listening to friends and neighbors about issues that impact them.  Steer away from the “flag” words that sound too political or to extreme.  The establishment has already prepped the battlefield by making it appear that our ideas about liberty and freedom are extreme, so we need to adjust our tactics.  We need to take a common sense approach when talking about our national debt and out of control spending.  We need to ask them if they manage their family budgets the same way the government is managing its budget.  We need to show them that embracing liberty is not only good from them and their children but how it’s good for America.  We need to not be afraid to talk about the serious problems we face.  I believe Americas are ready to address them.  It’s the politicians who are not.  These are a few ways we can adjust our tactics.  I have found that they do work.  The less political you sound, the more they will tune into what you are trying to say.  And that in my opinion is a recipe for success.  That’s how you win over the hearts and minds of conservatives and diminish the hold the establishment has on the movement.  Let me know what you think.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal

Share

Warnings About Communism From People That Lived Under it

Share

Perhaps I should say, “emphasis on the ‘under it.”  As we all know, Communism in actual application is perhaps the most tyrannical killing machine ever devised by man.  Unfortunately, as we saw with OWS, many of those would-be Marxists deny that the deaths, starvation, or shortages occurred at all.  Fortunately for us, there are millions of people that lived under communism that can speak out on what really happened.  Glenn Beck interviewed several recently…

I wish there was a bit more, but I think the point is conveyed. But, as our friend Bezmmenov has told us, the truth means nothing to OWS, or other useful idiots…

Everytime I see a leftist argue by attacking people personally, rather than present information (because they have none), I am reminded of Bezmenov’s point, “They are programmed to respond to certain stimuli…”

Sad, but true. However, the good news is that not everyone is brainwashed like the OWS and, say the pro-labor crowd. So, we still have a fighting chance.

Share

The Most Racist Racist Video About Racists of the Year

Share

Overkill on the title?  Perhaps, but you’ll understand when you see evidence.  You see, I’ve uncovered the most racist video about racism that you will see all this year.  So pervasive is the racism, that the racists that made it won an imaginary award for being the most racist racists in all the land.  Just be warned of the racism within the video…

Can’t you see?  It’s incredible racism to encourage anyone to abandon the loving arms of the Democratic party Government Plantation.

If you want more information on the racism, and the racists that promote it, take a look at their HQ.

Share