Sweet Land of Liberty My Ass!

Imagine, if you will, that you suddenly found yourself in an uninhabited land, with an abundance of resources at your disposal, and only yourself to depend upon for your very survival. This purest form of existence is what’s known as the State of Nature; in which each individual shares both the freedom to seek their own path in life, and the responsibility for their own survival.

This is the condition the very first settlers to this country voluntarily placed themselves in; leaving the comfort of society in their home lands to come and face the unknown in a continent 3,000 miles away. Why would anyone voluntarily leave the safety and comfort of the known for the peril of establishing a new life for themselves in the unknown?

The answer is quite simple; freedom. What is freedom if it is not the ability to make your own choices in life? But freedom is like a coin; it has two sides. On one side you have the freedom to do as you please, while on the other side you have the responsibility of accepting the consequences of the choices you make. These consequences are yours, and yours alone to bear.

There is not a human being alive today that has not been born into some form of society; each with their own set of laws or customs to regulate their behavior. When one speaks of a law they typically attach a penalty for the disobedience of that law. But what is the fundamental nature and purpose of laws?

Law is simply defined as the system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its member and may enforce by the imposition of penalties. But where do these laws come from, under what authority are they put into place and for what purpose should they serve?
In 1850 a Frenchman named Frederic Bastiat wrote a book entitled The Law, wherein he states, “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”

That is almost like the age old question of ‘What came first; the chicken or the egg’, instead being changed to read, “What came first; life, liberty and property, or the law?” It was because men entered into societies that laws began to be made to regulate the actions of their members. Therefore the question begs to be asked, what are the reasons for which laws are written?

The obvious answer is to better ensure that each member of society is free to enjoy their rights under Natural Law to the fullest extent. Again, to quote from Bastiat, “Each of us has a natural right—from God—to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

If every person has the right to defend—even by force—his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right—its reason for existing, its lawfulness—is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.”

The law can have no other purpose than to safeguard the life, liberty and property of the members of the society which promulgate the law. When laws begin being written that do anything other than that they cross over and become unjust; oppressive; as they begin restricting one’s ability to fully enjoy their rights, or the fruits of their labor. Or, as Bastiat put it, “The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!”

When our Constitution was written a Preamble was included which declared the purpose for which the government created by that document was to serve. It does not grant any specific powers; it merely states intent. The Preamble to our Constitution reads as follows: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” (My emphasis)

Liberty is defined as the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. Jefferson defined rightful liberty in a letter to Francis Gilmer as follows, “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”

Government can only be established by two means; either by a grant of delegated authority, or it must be assumed by those who seek to rule over others. In America our system of government was created by a grant of power given to elected representatives to act, for certain specific purposes, on behalf of the entities which it represented; the people and the States. When government goes beyond the specific powers granted it by the charter which created it in the first place, its actions become violations of the law. It is that simple.

It does not matter that a majority of the people are in favor of their government passing a law which violates the liberty, or takes the property of one class of citizens for the benefit of another; if it is not among the specific powers granted government by the solemn act of the people of constituting government, then it is a violation of the law and a crime against humanity in general.

In 1866 the Supreme Court ruled, “The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of men than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” (Ex parte Milligan)

Neither the government, believing its actions to be in the best interests of the people or the nation, nor the people, can ask their government to do things which overstep the constitutional limitations upon government.

In 1786 James Madison wrote a letter to James Monroe in which he stated, “There is no maxim in my opinion which is more liable to be misapplied, and which therefore needs elucidation than the current one that the interest of the majority is the political standard of right and wrong… In fact it is only reestablishing under another name and a more specious form, force as the measure of right…”

I can’t count the laws which have been passed which somehow restrict the liberty of the people of this country. To make matters worse, society has imposed its will, in the form of political correctness, upon people further limiting their freedom to speak as their opinions dictate.

For instance, when one speaks openly about enforcing existing immigration law the politically correct crowd begins chanting the mantra of racist as a means of silencing the truth; that our immigration system is not broken, the laws contained within it are simply not being enforced.

I do not want to make this about immigration, I was simply using that as an example of how our nation refuses to enforce the laws which are in place in accordance with the power granted government by the Constitution, all the while allowing laws to be enforced which are NOT in accordance with the powers granted government by the Constitution.

The Federal Reserve is another perfect example. Congress has the authority to coin money and regulate the value thereof. They do not have the authority to give that power over to another group; especially a group of private bankers such as those hold controlling interest in the FED.

It has been said that the average citizen cannot go about their daily affairs without breaking enough laws to land them in jail for the rest of their life. Typically these laws are not enforced until one becomes too critical of the actions of their government; it is then that the full weight of the law, so to speak, is brought to bear upon them.

James Madison, in Federalist 62, declared, “It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what is will be tomorrow.”

People are so caught up right now in the presidential election; with those on the Trump side supporting his plans for a wall between Mexico and the US, the lowering of taxes, and his plan for making America great again, and those on the Hillary side supporting all her socialist plans to provide things which benefit all her supporters.

Not once have I heard either candidate, or any of their supporters for that matter, speak of restoring the liberty we have lost because our government has enacted laws which overstep the specific grant of authority given them by the people, or by its breaches upon the sacred barrier which protects our most fundamental rights. NOT ONCE!!!!

In 1822 James Madison wrote a letter to W. T. Barry wherein he stated, “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” Let me tell you the ignorance of the average person in regards to the history of this country and its system of government is breathtaking in its scope and breadth; it makes the Grand Canyon seem like a mere crack in the sidewalk in comparison.

I saw a video just yesterday of Mark Dice interviewing people on the street asking them what was it about Hillary Clinton’s conservative platform that they supported. The answers he got left my jaw hanging with a sense of despair for the future of this country.

People say that those in our government probably don’t even know what the Constitution says. Oh, they know all right; they simply don’t care what it says. There is something else they know as well, that being that the average voter doesn’t know the first thing about what the Constitution says, and is therefore easily fooled into accepting law after law which further enslaves them.

In a letter to his wife written in 1775, John Adams stated, “But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it.”

That may very well be true; that we have lost our liberty and are never to regain it. But there is also another fundamental truth which was declared by John Locke in his Second Treatise on Civil Governments; that being, “…whenever the legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge, which God hath provided for all men, against force and violence. Whensoever therefore the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society; and either by ambition, fear, folly or corruption, endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who. have a right to resume their original liberty…”

Whether you choose to see it or not, our government has declared war upon our liberty, and as the Declaration of Independence states, it is our right, OUR DUTY, to throw off government when its intent to place us under absolute despotism becomes apparent.

Is that treason? I think not. Treason is what the government is guilty of; by its overstepping of granted powers and its continued violation of our sacred rights our government has proven time and time again that it no longer serves the purpose for which it was created.

I am not saying to take up arms and overthrow it; that would be foolish. I am saying, however, that I no longer care to participate in the fraud of choosing who will be my slave-master. You might think that Trump, or Clinton for that matter, have all the answers and can fix all that is wrong in America. Just realize this, once whoever gets elected gets into power, if they upset the status quo, rock the boat too much, they will find themselves going down in history in the footsteps of former presidents Lincoln and Kennedy.

Those who control our government have worked too hard, too long, to lose the control they wield over government. They are not going to sit back and let anybody, even a Donald Trump, upset their plans.

As it was said in the classic 1939 movie The Wizard of Oz, “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.” Americans are engrossed in the grand spectacle of choosing a new president, while ignoring the men behind the scenes who own and control our government, and the continued violations of the very law which created it.

So no matter who you have decided to vote for this coming November, don’t you dare tell me that your candidate is going to restore liberty in this country. Liberty was lost a long time ago and, aside from a small portion of this country, nobody even batted an eye about it.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

The Truth Is All That Matters

Have you ever asked yourself what is meant by the phrase United States of America? When you attend an event where you are asked to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, what exactly are you pledging your allegiance to? Is it the government you are pledging your allegiance to; the country; or, as the pledge itself declares, a Republic?

One must understand the timeline of our nation’s history if one is to discover what we are, or what we’ve become. The very first settlers to this country came here by charters granted them by the King of England to establish British Colonies here upon American soil. For all intents and purposes they were British citizens; albeit without any representation in British Government.

For nearly 150 years the subjects, or Colonists if you prefer that term instead, lived peacefully under British rule and British protection. Then in 1756 Britain began imposing taxes upon the colonists which the Colonists felt were a violation of their rights as British citizens.

They petitioned their King and when their petitions went unanswered they openly rebelled against what they believed to be violations of their rights as free men. Many of the early documents prior to the War for Independence declare that they sought no separation from England, only that their rights be restored.

When it became clear that there would be no redress for their grievances, accompanied by the Kings men attempting to disarm them at Lexington and Concord, it became apparent that the only way to restore their liberty, or rights, was to seek a dissolution of the bonds which had tied them to England; in short, complete and absolute independence was their only option. They sought not dominion over England, only that they be allowed to govern themselves in the manner which they felt best secured to them their rights under Natural Law.

Our Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest document ever written on the rights of man and the nature and purpose of government. It does not declare that men must remain bound to a system of government which violates the rights of the people it governs. In fact it states just the opposite; that it is their right of any people to dissolve the bonds which ties to another, “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.”

The Declaration then goes on to say, “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.”

These are the principles which saw the birth of our nation; essentially making the Declaration of Independence our nation’s birth certificate and establishing the principles contained within it as the guideline for any and all forms of government we might chose for ourselves; and furthermore declaring what is our right and our duty when that government no longer serves the purpose for which it was established.

When the war to gain what the Declaration of Independence formally declared was finally won, what did we become; a nation or thirteen independent nations?

Upon General Cornwallis’s surrender at Yorktown the process for a cessation of hostilities began, culminating in the signing of the Treaty of Paris in 1783 with representatives of the newly established United States affixing their signatures on behalf of our new nation. By so signing they were agreeing to the terms of the surrender as well as the facts stated therein.

Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris plainly states that each Colony was a free and independent state, “His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states…”

During the interim of fighting to gain the independence the Colonies had proclaimed by the Declaration of Independence, they had also written, and sent out to be ratified, a document entitled The Articles of Confederation. Although not formally ratified until 1781, the Congress that it outlined continued to exist and manage the war effort against England.

What exactly is a confederation? Well a confederation is a loose organization of parties or groups united in alliance or league; or a union of countries with some or most political power vested in some sort of central government.

These Articles of Confederation were, in effect, our countries first constitution; having established a system of government to manage the affairs of the nation and establishing the power and authority it would wield.

Article XIII, or 13 for those of you who can’t read Roman Numerals, declares, “Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.”

During this time there were those who felt that the government created by this document was far from what was needed for our country. Some men, like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, felt that the Congress established by the Articles of Confederation were weak and ineffective. Whether there was any validity to their claim that trade was suffering or that Congress was unable to effectively raise revenue to fund the operation of the government is beside the point. The point is that the manner by which any changes or alterations to the existing form of government would be made was clearly outlined in Article 13.

When the delegates to the convention in Philadelphia arrived, they showed up believing that they were there to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation for the state legislatures to consider. When Madison announced his grand scheme to establish an entirely new system of government he was guilty of violating the law as it existed then. His plan, no matter how noble and in the best interests of the country he may have felt it to be, was in direct violation of the process outlined by Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation.

You might find it interesting that of the 55 who attended the convention which produced the Constitution, only 39 signed it. George Mason, Elbridge Gerry, and Edmund Randolph refused to sign it, while Rhode Island never even sent any delegates to the convention at all.

When presented to the State Legislatures for their consideration, the finalized document which did not specifically amend the Articles of Confederation should have been rejected on the spot, and the delegates sent home without having achieved a single thing. Unfortunately, that’s not what happened.

Not knowing what to do with this completely new document, the Congress forwarded it to the State Legislatures without a yea or nay vote, once again violating Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation. There only act was to send out instructions on how to call for conventions within the States so that the people could then vote for ratification or rejection.

I won’t go into the actual ratification process, or the tricks and shenanigans pulled by those who supported the Constitution; just let it be said that there remain questions as to whether those who supported the Constitution played fair.

The important question is, what did this new document create? Were we to continue to be a confederation of independent States, or did we establish a national or a federal form of government? Madison, in typical double speak, waffled back and forth saying that in some aspects it was national in nature, and in others it was federal.

When Patrick Henry spoke out in opposition to the Constitution he did so because he feared the form this new government would take; a consolidation of the States into one entity, eventually stripping the States, and the people, of all their rights and sovereignty. He began his speech of June 5, 1788 by saying, “I rose yesterday to ask a question which arose in my own mind. When I asked that question, I thought the meaning of my interrogation was obvious: The fate of this question and of America may depend on this: Have they said, we, the States? Have they made a proposal of a compact between states? If they had, this would be a confederation: It is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government. The question turns, Sir, on that poor little thing-the expression, We, the people, instead of the States, of America.”

We may have created, as Franklin declared, a Republic, but was that Republic federalist in nature or nationalist? A republic is a sovereign state or country which is organized with a form of government in which power resides in elected representatives chosen by the people with that government exercising power according to the rule of law. Yet a republic can exist in two forms; a national form in which all power and authority is held by the central government, or a federal form in which power is shared by the central government with smaller component units; i.e. the States. In short, a federal government reserves certain powers not defined by our Constitution to the States, while a national government swallows up, or encompasses all authority. If the Constitution had produced a national government then the States would surrender all authority to the central government created by the document.

It is important that you understand the difference between the two forms our republic could take; as today the words are used interchangeably, while in truth they mean entirely different things.

In arguing in support of the Constitution to the people of New York, James Madison declared the following, “The State governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or organization of the former.”

Madison then went on to say, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security.” (Federalist 45)

It would seem that Madison was stating that the system produced by the Constitution was federalist in nature, with certain powers held by the federal government while the remaining power being retained by the States. This fact is supported by the text of the 10th Amendment, which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Yet within a decade of going into effect, the government created by the Constitution sought to exercise powers which infringed upon the authority of the States. When John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts, his own Vice-President, Thomas Jefferson, responded by writing the Kentucky Resolutions, wherein it states, “Resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government . . . . and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.”

Jefferson sought only to preserve the power retained by the States against any encroachment by the federal government. He also declared an important principle; that of nullification; that when the federal government oversteps its delegated authority the laws it enacts are null and void.

Yet that spirit which guided Jefferson was soon to fade into obscurity as the nation grew. Power, it cannot be denied, is a thing which seeks but two things. First it seeks to maintain its existence, and second it seeks to expand its scope.

From the very beginning our nation was divided between the industrial North and the agricultural South. Yes the South utilized slave labor to pick their crops, but the slaves they held were brought to this country primarily by Northern ship owners and the slave trade, while benefitting the cotton plantations in the South, enriched the Northern ship owners.

Slavery was also allowed for by the Constitution, as abominable as the practice may be. The drafters of it knew that were they to include language banning slavery that they would never have gotten the South to accept the document; so they left the evil of slavery in place just so they could see their central government go into effect.

With the advent of political parties, with the North being primarily Republican and the South Democrat, the battle for control of Congress began in earnest. Tariffs were instituted which hurt the South, only to provide internal improvements in the North. All the while measures were taken to weaken the South’s power in Congress by attempting to prohibit slavery in newly admitted States.

You have to realize, that as evil as slavery was, it was legal under the Constitution. By the Republicans seeking to limit the admission of slave owning States they could undermine the Democrats, as slaves were counted towards representation in the House. By not allowing slavery into newly admitted States they were shifting the balance of power towards themselves in the House of Representatives.

This battle between the industrial North and the agricultural South waged on for years, heating up in the 1830′s only to boil over in 1860, culminating in the Civil War.

No matter what you have been taught about the Civil War being a war to free the slaves, it was not about slavery, or the continuation of it. It was about the federal government trying to force its will upon the States and the States seeking to exercise their right to dissolve the bonds which tied them to the Union; as stated in the Declaration of Independence.

Was slavery an issue? Of course it was; but it was not the ONLY issue which led the South into seceding from the Union. Just as Jefferson stated in the Declaration of Independence, “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.”

Abraham Lincoln felt that it was his duty to hold the Union together; at any cost. He did not raise an army of 75,000 to free the slaves; he did so to force the South into adherence to the Union, or quell the rebellion as he called it.

In his Inaugural Address Lincoln openly admitted, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” Lincoln’s choice of words are interesting though; as he clearly admits that he has no intention of interfering with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists, showing that he probably felt the same as the Republicans in the North about the institution being allowed in newly admitted States.

It is my belief that Lincoln acted not so much to save the Union, but to save the government. Prior to the Civil War a delegation of Southerners were dispatched to hold meetings to avert the impending war. When asked why Lincoln not allow the South to secede in peace, he responded by saying, “I can’t let them go. Who would pay for the government? And, what then will become of my tariff?”

In an article published in the Union Democrat, Manchester, New Hampshire, dated 19 February, 1861, it was written, “The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? Literally nothing…it is very clear that the South gains by this process and we lose. No…we must not let the South go.”

No, the Civil War was not fought over slavery, it was fought so that Abraham Lincoln could preserve the existence of the government and the interests of the Northern States; for without the South both would perish.

Just 30 short years after the end of the Civil War, Woodrow Wilson wrote a book wherein he told the truth about the lies that we have been taught about this conflict, “It was necessary to put the South at a moral disadvantage by transforming the contest from a war waged against states fighting for their independence into a war waged against states fighting for the maintenance and extension of slavery…and the world, it might be hoped, would see it as a moral war, not a political; and the sympathy of nations would begin to run for the North, not for the South.” (A History of The America People, page 231)

It has been said that history is written by the victors of any conflict, and this is no truer than the history we are being taught regarding the Civil War.

History, for it to be honest, should be truthful. Unfortunately the history we are being taught regarding this period of American history is filled with lies and rhetoric designed to put the South at, what Wilson described as, a moral disadvantage. By making the war out to be one which was fought to free the slaves and end the practice of slavery, it hides the true nature of the war, a total subjugation of an entire segment of the country which still believed in State sovereignty. In effect, it fulfilled Patrick Henry’s fear of a consolidation of all powers by the federal government.

The truth, if you care to hear it, was printed in an article published in the London Times in 1861, “[T]he contest is really for empire on the side of the North, and for independence on that of the South, and in this respect we recognize an exact analogy between the North and the Government of George III, and the South and the Thirteen Revolted Provinces. These opinions…are the general opinions of the English nation.”

The South ONLY fought to defend their right to live as a people governed by a government which would best secure their future security; the same as the original 13 Colonies did nearly a century prior. Whether their beliefs regarding slavery were an evil which they would later be held accountable for is irrelevant, they had the right to dissolve the bonds which held them to any union and form their own system of government to secure their rights.

Abraham Lincoln, by using force to compel obedience, shredded the principles contained within the Declaration of Independence. You might ask yourself if Lincoln considered those who fought in the Confederacy to be treasonous, why Confederate President Jefferson Davis never stood trial for the crime of treason.

Davis was imprisoned, shackled, given only a Bible to read, and fed poorly for nearly two years before he was finally released. Why did he never have his day in court? It is because had he been tried the issue, not of slavery, but of secession would be introduced and the overwhelming majority still held that it was a State’s right to secede from the Union. By not holding a trial they could avoid ever having to legitimize the cause of the South; thereby placing the blame for all the horror and death squarely where it belonged; upon the shoulders of Abraham Lincoln.

As Robert E. Lee would later say, “Everyone should do all in his power to collect and disseminate the truth, in the hope that it may find a place in history and descend to posterity. History is not the relation of campaigns and battles and generals or other individuals, but that which shows the principles for which the South contended and which justified her struggle for those principles.”

Our nation has seen itself transform from colonies under a monarch to 13 free and independent nations; to a republic with a federal form of a central government, to an empire with a national form of government.

With each succeeding generation our government has assumed, usurped to be more accurate, more and more power and control over the authority of the States, and the rights and liberty of the people. The Civil War was the last gasp of freedom in this country, as from their defeat by the North, we have been slaves to our government ever since.

It’s entirely up to you whether you accept the things I’ve just said, or to reject them because they conflict with what you have been taught. I know within my heart that I have spoken the truth, and that’s all that matters.

So, while the Confederate Battle Flag, or the Southern Cross, may offend many of you, I display it with honor; as it represents not only the just cause of the Confederacy, but the same cause fought for so long ago by the original colonies who sought their freedom from a tyrant.

I may have been born in Yankee territory, but my heart is, and will forever remain, with the South. They fought to forestall the inevitable outcome of the fears of men like Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Thomas Jefferson of a consolidation of all powers by the federal government. When the South lost the Civil War the States and the people of this country lost as well.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Does The Truth No Longer Matter?

Mark Twain once said “Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it.” What is the truth? Well, my understanding of the truth is pretty simple; things that are factually correct. The truth knows no political parties, takes no sides, and does not care about political correctness; it simply is the facts as they actually exist.

Why then would Twain say never tell the truth to people who unworthy of it? Well, for the truth to be of any use people must accept it; putting aside all previously held beliefs only to examine the facts as they actually exist and forming an opinion based upon fact rather than emotional bias. People today are either reluctant to do that, or the truth simply no longer matters; possibly a combination of both.

I grew up in a household that, until my father passed away, was staunchly Republican. To say that I was indoctrinated into despising the Democrats would be an understatement; it was almost a part of my DNA. I grew up with the seeds implanted in my mind that the Democrats were Communists and that the Republicans had all the answers and could do no wrong.

I no longer hold that belief; I am free of the two party paradigm which still entraps so many in this country today. What is it that freed me? To put is plainly; the truth freed me. For some reason, deep down inside, I had this rebel gene which caused me to question everything; never accept anything as valid until I could prove it, or disprove it, for myself.

For years, decades actually, that gene only caused me problems by rebelling against all authority; from the discipline imposed upon me by my parents to the rules which I was obligated to obey during my time in the military; I was always pushing the limits of authority and paying the price for it.

Then something, and to this day I still can’t identify why, I began to shift my distrust of authority towards my government. It’s not that I sought to overthrow it, or bring it down; it is more that I simply stopped trusting it to do what is right and to tell me the truth about things. It could have been inconsistencies and lies that my subconscious picked up on and ruminated over, taking years to come to the conclusion that my government was not doing what it was supposed to be doing; or it could have been something else altogether; I simply don’t know.

Whatever the case may be I began studying the founding documents of this country; in depth. These studies led me to the writings of our nation’s founders; both those for our current system of government and those opposed to it.

I still had faith that our system of government was fundamentally good, only that it had been corrupted by special interests whose influence over those who represent us causes our lawmakers to pass laws which violate the Constitution. I still believe that to a degree; although not to the extent I once did. I now believe that our Constitution, although it may have produced a sound system of government, was written in such a way that it was destined to fail.

There were those who saw this coming and tried to warn the people not to accept this new system of government. Among those who were most outspoken against it was one Patrick Henry; the same Patrick Henry who so famously declared, “Give me liberty or give me death.”

On June 5, 1788 Patrick Henry stood up and delivered the first of two lengthy speeches in opposition to the proposed Constitution; the other would follow on June 7th of the same year. In his speech of June 5 Henry declared, “You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased, nor how you are to become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured; for liberty ought to be the direct end of your Government.”

Henry’s words sound strikingly similar to the words Jefferson would later pen, forming our 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.”

In fact, the Preamble to our Constitution, its declaration of intent and purpose, clearly states, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” (My emphasis)

Do people today even understand what liberty is? Do they think it is freedom to choose what clothes to wear, what vehicle to drive, what food to eat, and what to watch on TV or listen to on the radio? Although that is part of liberty, it is not all it encompasses; far from it in fact.

Liberty is defined as the state of being free within a society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. Jefferson defines liberty as, “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.”
Using those examples as guides, can you honestly tell me that we experience liberty in this country? With all the rules and regulations which govern our actions can you honestly tell me that the only limits to your liberty are the equal rights of those around you? When speech…when the truth can be restricted because others find it offensive I would have to say no, we do not have liberty in America today; we have censorship.

In 1765 John Adams wrote his Dissertation on Canon and Feudal Law in which he writes, “Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them understandings, and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge; I mean, of the characters and conduct of their rulers.”

Again, there is that word liberty. Today, when a woman like Hillary Clinton can run for president instead of serving time behind bars for all the crimes she has committed, I have to ask myself does the character and conduct of the people we select to represent us in our government really matter anymore?
When the boundaries which delineate the powers granted each branch of our government have become so murky, so obfuscated, that the Executive now takes legislative action and the Legislature enacts laws which the Constitution prohibits them from enacting, does the conduct of our rulers really matter to anyone anymore?

You see, going back to Jefferson’s quote on liberty, he continues by saying, “I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” (Letter to Francis Gilmer, 1816)

Just because our government, and this includes our State governments as well, enacts a law, it does not make it just. If a law violates the Constitution, the Constitution takes precedence and the people can act as though the law was never passed. Our Constitution was ratified by the people as an express delegation of certain powers to a system of government. When that government oversteps the limits imposed upon it the people, who created this system of government, are under no obligation to obey these usurpations of power and authority.

But that takes courage; especially when your government has an army at its disposal to enforce its will upon those it governs. I speak not only of the armed forces of this country, I speak also of all the militarized agencies such as the ATF, the DEA, the Federal Marshalls, the FBI, and all those other alphabet soup acronyms whose sole purpose is to enforce, as Jefferson said, the tyrants will.

Getting back to something I said earlier, this is why I believe, that although the basic structure and framework for government our Constitution outlines is good, I believe it was doomed from the very beginning; because it left out one vital thing; the ability to punish those who violated it. It is just as Patrick Henry said, “My great objection to this Government is, that it does not leave us the means of defending our rights, or of waging war against tyrants.”

Our only power is at the voting booth and look how well that has worked out for preserving our liberty. You see, Henry would go on to say, “The Honorable Gentleman who presides, told us, that to prevent abuses in our Government, we will assemble in Convention, recall our delegated powers, and punish our servants for abusing the trust reposed in them. Oh, Sir, we should have fine times indeed, if to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people. Your arms wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone; and you have no longer an aristocratical; no longer democratical spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all? You read of a riot act in a country which is called one of the freest in the world, where a few neighbors cannot assemble without the risk of being shot by a hired soldiery, the engines of despotism.”

But none if this seems to matter to anyone, that everything the so-called Anti-Federalists warned us would happen, has happened. None of this would have, could have happened had the people remained educated and virtuous in the choosing of those who would represent them in this government.

On the final day of the convention that produced our Constitution, Ben Franklin warned of the dangers it contained, saying, “I agree to this Constitution, with all its Faults, if they are such; because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well administered; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a Course of Years, and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other.”

Well, that day has come; in fact it happened a long, long time ago; and it is all because the truth, the facts, no longer matter to people. All they care about is what their government can do for them, not the limits imposed upon it by those who created it. Was it not John F. Kennedy who said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”?

We are well beyond the point Robert Heinlein spoke of when he wrote the following, “The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’

‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome.”

The truth no longer matters to people anymore. When information is so readily available, yet so widely ignored, there can be no hope for an enlightened and informed society to refrain its government from becoming tyrannical and oppressive. When people can name the entire offensive line of their favorite football team, nor name 10 Pokemon but not the name of the Vice President of the United States; we are in serious trouble.

The evil that we have allowed to infiltrate and which permeates through our government cannot be stopped at the voting booth; it is far too pervasive for extrication by that. Even a revolution would have very little chance of success as long as the people of this country choose to remain ignorant about the true purpose for which their government was established.

I sometimes feel as Patrick Henry must have when he spoke to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, saying, “Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man, may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old fashioned: If so, I am contented to be so: I say, the time has been when every pore of my heart beat for American liberty, and which, I believe, had a counterpart in the breast of every true American.”

I am not asking you to pick up a gun and go out to war against your government. All I ask is that you see government for what it is; your enemy. Stop believing that the Republican candidate, or the Democratic candidate has the answers; when the truth is that no matter whom you elect our government will continue to grow, and continue to diminish what remaining liberty you have left.

Is that too much to ask? (A rhetorical question of course) But getting back to my opening quote by Twain, I sometimes wonder why I keep doing this; writing these articles when the only people who seem to read them already know the things I write about, and the intended audience lets these concepts I write about go in one ear and out the other without affecting a change in their way of thinking.

Does the truth truly no longer matter to anyone anymore?

Posted in General | 2 Comments

The Unforgivable Crime of Willful Ignorance

I simply do not understand people. Would you take your car to be worked on by a mechanic who did not understand the basic workings of an internal combustion engine? Would you go see a doctor who did not understand basic human anatomy? I would hope the answer to both questions would be no. Then why do so many people vote for people whose statements on the campaign trail clearly prove they have no working knowledge of our Constitution?

The answer to that question can only be one of two things; either the average voter does not know what the Constitution says, or they don’t care what it says. I could understand ignorance of what the Constitution says, forgive it almost, but to not care is unforgivable.

Do people not understand that without our Constitution we would NOT be voting for a president every four years? Do people not realize that without our Constitution our government, as we know it now, would not even exist?

I don’t know if people today are simply incapable of analytical thought, otherwise known as critical thinking, or if they simply are too lazy to sit down and ponder these ‘deep’ subjects; as in doing so it might cause them to come to the conclusion that everything they currently believe in is a lie.

Were one to sit down and read, then think about, what Jefferson says in the Declaration of Independence then they might see that what our Founders went to war with their government over was far less than the conditions which are imposed upon us by our own government today.

People do not realize that, although some form of government is necessary, that to retain liberty the power and authority granted that government must remain minimal. It is almost like an old see-saw where when one side goes up the other goes down. If one side of the see-saw is liberty and the other is government, when liberty is up then governmental power is minimal, but when governmental authority is up, liberty is down.

Not only has our government assumed powers it was never intended it possess, the people of this country has beseeched government to do things for them which it was never intended that it be allowed to do. Passing laws to keep us safe is a perfect example of by the people asking their government to keep them safe they willingly sacrifice a portion of their freedom. How many gun laws have been passed violating our fundamental right to keep and bear arms because people fear becoming victims to gun crime? How many laws have been passed to keep us safe from terrorism which violates the rest of the Bill of Rights?

Have people forgotten that these people they elect are beholden to those who elect them? Have people forgotten that these people who hold office take an oath to support and defend the Constitution? Either the ignorance, or the apathy, of the general voting public are to blame for allowing those who hold these seats of power to violate the trust granted them to govern according to the limits imposed upon their actions by the very document which established the government they are elected to serve in.

People place far too much emphasis on the election of a president when the truth is that the president, while having a great many powers, cannot, in and of himself, do anything. Congress is the lawmaking body and the president’s job is merely to see that the laws are faithfully upheld. Sure, he can make suggestions to Congress, but they are under no obligation to take action upon them. Why then do so many people become so involved in presidential elections, basing their decisions as to whom they will vote for upon the things these candidates promise to do? All this shows me is that people do not understand, or care about the basic structure of our government and the powers granted each branch.

When people talk about Congress all they talk about is the gridlock between the two political parties; with insults and blame being tossed back and forth between the Republicans and the Democrats. Not once have I heard someone say that the real problem is that both parties have conflicting views, but both parties are also guilty of ignoring the constitutional limitations upon the powers granted Congress.

People are so caught up in the two party paradigm that they have forgotten, or don’t care, that both parties are guilty of overstepping the limited power the Constitution grants our government. I’m well aware that times have changed and that the powers granted government may not be enough to deal with the exigencies of today’s modern world; but that does not justify us allowing government to overstep the limits placed upon its authority. That path leads directly to tyranny and a total loss of all your freedom.

When George Washington refused a 3rd term as president and retired to private life, he penned a letter to the American people which set the precedent for all who followed; the Presidential Farewell Address. In his address Washington stated, “If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.” (My emphasis)

Our system of government was designed with certain checks and balances which, it was hoped, would keep each branch within its specific sphere of authority and within the overall powers granted government.

The president would have the power to veto laws sent to him by Congress; stating his reasons for doing so. Far too often today these vetoes occur because the sitting president is of one party while the other party controls a majority in Congress, making the president’s veto a partisan decision rather than a decision based upon his understanding of the powers granted Congress by the Constitution.

In 1817 Congress sent a bill to President James Madison for his signature. This bill would have authorized funding for internal improvements to roads and canals within the United States. Madison vetoed the bill, sending it back to Congress with the following message, “Having considered the bill this day presented to me entitled “An act to set apart and pledge certain funds for internal improvements,” and which sets apart and pledges funds “for constructing roads and canals, and improving the navigation of water courses, in order to facilitate, promote, and give security to internal commerce among the several States, and to render more easy and less expensive the means and provisions for the common defense,” I am constrained by the insuperable difficulty I feel in reconciling the bill with the Constitution of the United States to return it with that objection to the House of Representatives, in which it originated.

The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the enumerated powers, or that it falls by any just interpretation within the power to make laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution those or other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States.”

That is the check granted the president upon Congress. Congress was also divided into two Houses to both divide representation among the people and the States, who were to be co-equal members of the federal government, but to ensure that the sudden impulsive will of the people might be restrained by a the seasoned body of the Senate who represented the interests of the States.

With the ratification of the 17th Amendment the States were effectively shut out of the operation of the federal government; although in truth it was the unconstitutional Civil War; Lincoln’s use of force to compel obedience to his will, that ended any authority held by the States.

Today we vote for both those who represent us in the House and those who represent us in the Senate, making both houses of Congress susceptible corruption by outside influences without any means of halting that influence upon the body granted the authority to write our laws. Today we choose members of the House and Senate not based upon their desire to uphold the Constitution, but upon what the two political parties believe are their interpretations of the powers government should wield; what the Constitution actually says never comes into play and government continues to assume more and more power and authority over our lives. And remember my metaphor for the see-saw, well the inevitable outcome of more power held by government is less freedom for the people.

You are not going to hear the truth from those who seek your votes. That is like asking a used car salesman to tell you the truth about all the problems with the car he is trying to sell you. If you want the truth about the actual powers granted our government and the reason those powers were kept to a minimum you are going to have to dig into the history of that period which saw our nation gain its independence and then go about establishing its Constitution.

Should you choose to begin that journey for the truth you might find out that it was the States who held the authority to enact laws which directly affected the people; not the federal government, whose laws were to affect the States. Laws providing for anything other than the overall defense of the nation from attack were to be left to the States. So why is it that so many people know little to nothing about the candidates running for positions in their State governments, yet are quite outspoken and opinionated regarding those who hold the seats of power in the federal government?

Could it be that the State governments have become just as corrupted by the two party paradigm as is our federal government? Could it be that they have become so dependent upon federal funds for their internal affairs that they dare not challenge the violation of States Rights by the federal government?
All I know is that when I look at government, be it State of Federal, all I see is corruption and incompetence. I see no glimmer of hope for a turnaround to Constitutionally limited government because the people who vote for these men and women to represent them do not know, or care, what the Constitution says. If we don’t care, then it can be assured that those whom we elect don’t care either.

Yet people say I’m unpatriotic because I have chosen not to participate in the fraud of choosing the next president. You see, there is one other quote by George Washington by which I have chosen to live by, being the statement he made in 1795 which says, “The Constitution is the guide I will never abandon.” If I cannot find a candidate who has shown that they understand, and intend to adhere to the Constitution, then I will not vote for them; no matter how much better they are than any of the other candidates running for that same office.

If more people in this country felt like I do then maybe, just maybe we could fix all that ails this country. But first the people have to learn what the Constitution actually says; and that is a decision only each of you reading this can make for yourself. Either you will take the first step towards becoming informed, or you will live the rest of your life in ignorance.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

We Need A System Restore

When Microsoft released Windows 7 it came with a program called System Restore. The purpose of this program was to allow the user to restore their computer’s configuration to a certain date; prior to when it began operating inefficiently or erratically.

I remember when I was a child I would laugh at the old folks who used to say that they’ve been around a long time and have been witness to many a change in the US of A; most of it not so good. Now that I’ve been alive for close to six decades I am one of those old folks and I now understand what the old folks of my youth were talking about.

By any standards I do not consider myself to be that smart. I’ve met people on this quest for knowledge who are light years ahead of me in the things they know about the history of our country, the law, and with everything else regarding our system of government. These are the people I admire and respect; for they have taken the time to study and learn about these subjects and have obtained far more knowledge than I have; making their statements more relevant and believable because they are backed by fact rather than rhetoric they found on Facebook, the network news, or from some politician.

Like I said, I don’t see myself as being that smart. But I do have this burning desire to learn as much as I can about the subject matter I spend my time writing about. That, and that alone, is what sets me apart or above the majority of the people in this country. It does not make me smarter, it’s just that I care more about learning the history of my country and how its system of government was created and how it was supposed to function.

Getting back to System Restore for a moment, there is no going back in time; not unless someone in the scientific community has invented a functioning time machine. We can only go forward in time into the future; and to dream about the good ole days may bring one a warm fuzzy feeling, it does nothing to alleviate the problems we face in this country today.

However what System Restore does is not travel back in time per se, rather it restores your computer’s settings to a chosen date to remove any unwanted software or changes made to the operating system so that it functions as designed. (Although I’ve yet to see a version of Windows perform flawlessly)
America and Americans in particular, tend to place far too much hope and trust in their government; when the truth is that government itself is the cause and creator of most of our problems.

I remember the first time I sat down to read Atlas Shrugged; it was as if someone had opened a doorway into the secrets of the world. I saw the parallel between fiction and reality with such clarity that it almost left me breathless.

It would take too long to explain the entire story, so let it suffice to say that the people put their trust and faith in government and progressive policies, which only created more problems than they solved. Then when these new problems arose the people went to government saying ‘something must be done’ so the government enacted more policies; creating further problems. It was a vicious cycle that continued until at the end of the book the lights went out across the country and it was time for John Galt and his group of hold outs to go back and restore the country to the beliefs and principles which would allow it to thrive.

While I am no supporter of Donald Trump, I do agree with his campaign slogan; Let’s Make America Great Again. I’m all for that, I just differ in how I think it should be done.

I hear these so-called conservatives talk about how governmental regulations are strangling businesses; forcing them to move their operations to countries where all these rules and regulations do not apply to them.

Yet these same conservatives take great offense when I say that the laws which have been enacted to fight their holy war on terror do the same thing to liberty and freedom in this country. To even mention abolishing the Dept of Homeland Security or repealing the Patriot Act is to stir a hornet’s nest of outrage and label me as siding with the terrorists.

When I was in the Air Force my job was a Power Production Specialist; I worked on generators; from small portable ones all the way up to big ones providing power for communications facilities. When I was stationed at Castle Air Force Base in California there was a guy I worked with who wasn’t very good at troubleshooting problems. Instead of getting out a wiring diagram and trying to trace the problem to its source he would open a control panel and start removing and replacing relays and switches until he found the bad one or gave up in frustration.

I see America today as being very similar in its attempts to rectify all the problems we are currently facing. We go to the polls and remove and replace politicians without ever seeking to understand how the system is supposed to function. We put all our trust and faith in government to do the right thing, and then when it doesn’t, we simply remove one or two components from it thinking that will solve the problem.

America needs to do a System Restore of sorts in that we need to go back to the operating system as it was originally designed. We need to limit government to only those powers specifically granted it by the Constitution. We need to limit each branch of government to the powers granted that branch; eliminating the crossover and usurpations of power by the other branches. We need to rekindle our love of liberty and guard it jealously from any encroachment by both law and societal demands.

Our system of government was not designed to provide things for us or make our lives better. It was designed to generally manage the affairs of a nation so that the individual States could peacefully coexist side by side with each other, while at the same time provide for the common defense. It was the state governments which were to do the things needed for the people living within each respective State.

Have you ever read the 10th Amendment? It says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Where in the Constitution does it say that our federal government has the authority to provide health care for the people of this country? Where in the Constitution does it give government the authority to mandate participation in a retirement plan? (Social Security) Where in the Constitution does it allow for the government to tell us what drugs are illegal?

When the people of this country felt that alcohol was a problem they passed a Constitutional Amendment which banned it. When that didn’t work, when it created the problem of bootlegging and organized crime, they repealed the 18th Amendment. But never did they allow government to arbitrarily decide that alcohol was suddenly illegal to consume.

We the people of this country are the true sovereigns and our rights are sovereign as well. Government, in all forms, exists solely by a grant of power from the sovereigns of this country to act on our behalf for certain specific purposes by a charter, or Constitution. When government begins taking upon itself what powers it shall wield, and then by coercion it enforces its will upon the people; that is tyranny my friends.

And yet you silly Americans think that by simply going to the polls and switching out a half dozen or so representatives and a president that you are going to make America great again? Not until each of you stops asking for government to do anything for you other than keep our nation safe from outside attack and regulate commerce between the States.

Congress has the power to declare war and a delegated power cannot be given away to another by those to whom it was originally delegated. Congress cannot pass a resolution granting the Executive Branch discretionary power to send US troops abroad to fight in countries that have never directly attacked the US. END OF STORY!!!!

This war on terror is a smokescreen to keep the funds rolling in to the military industrial complex and establish US friendly regimes in countries that have never directly attacked the US. I’m not denying the existence of terrorist groups who seek to do us harm; but to give the president the power to send troops into Afghanistan today, and maybe Iran next week is insane and a clear breach of the separation of powers.

Our Founders warned us of the dangers of foreign entanglements while John Quincy Adams said the following about our involvement in the affairs of other nations, “She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart… But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”

What we need is a System Restore, a return to the beliefs and principles upon which our nation was founded. Replacing one set of corrupt representatives, or a president even, with another is an exercise in futility and only proves that the majority of the people in this country don’t know the first thing about how their system of government was supposed to function.

I’ve heard people say that our country began going downhill after the Kennedy assassination and the programs instituted by LBJ. I’ve heard people say that it began going downhill after the socialist programs enacted by FDR. No, our system began going downhill almost the moment it was created with Hamilton bending Washington’s ear, leading to the belief that there were ‘implied’ powers within the Constitution that allowed for expansive growth of government. Our country went off the deep end into the slide towards tyranny when Abraham Lincoln denied a segment of the country to dissolve the ties which bound them to the Union; abolishing all the Declaration of Independence stood for.

We have never recovered and we never will until the people take the time to learn, and apply, the beliefs of the men who lived during the period which saw our nation go from being subjects to freemen.

If we can’t do that all we are doing is choosing who will be our masters. Daniel Webster once said something you need to consider, “There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”

Webster also said, “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.”

In 1866 the Supreme Court ruled, “The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of men than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.”

The Constitution is merely a piece of parchment with words written upon it. It only has life when the people of this country adhere to what the words written upon it say. It is when we abandon those words, those beliefs and principles, that tyranny takes hold and we go from being free men to slaves.

But you go ahead, you vote for Trump, or you vote for Hillary if that’s what makes you feel good. Just be warned that it won’t make a damned bit of difference because government will continue to get bigger and bigger and with that will come further losses of what few remaining rights you have left.

But hey, this is the land of the free and the home of the brave, and as long as a majority continue to believe that then all must be well. But one of these days, possibly sooner than I care to admit, reality is going to shake America out of its slumber and the people are going to ask “What the hell happened to my freedom?”

When that day comes I’ll say freedom was lost because you cared more about football, Facebook, catching Pokemon on your iPhone, and a whole host of other things that kept you entertained and ignorant rather than acting like real Americans and defending it.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Drowning In An Ocean Of Ignorance

I wonder if people ever stop to think how truly ignorant they are? I could forgive them their ignorance; find it amusing even, if the consequences of it had no affect on me or my life. Unfortunately it does, so the only thing your ignorance does is anger me.

Ben Franklin once said “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” Ignorance and stupidity are not the same things; unless ignorance is willful decision, at which time it becomes stupidity; especially when people make decisions, the consequences of which are of the utmost importance to their liberty.

When I hear people talk about politics, or the history of this country, I hear the damndest of statements come out of their mouths. I’m not picking on women in general, but when I hear someone say they intend to vote for Hillary because “it’s about time we had a woman president” I get so upset I feel like I’m going to vomit.

Why should anyone vote for someone to hold the highest office in our land simply because of their gender? Whatever happened to voting for the person who is best qualified, or has the highest level of virtue? Have we become so superficial and unconcerned with integrity that a person’s gender, or ethnic background are more important than whether or not the person we vote for has any integrity or ethics? (It’s a rhetorical question people, you don’t need to answer)

Make no mistake, I’m not throwing my support behind Donald Trump either, it’s just that those who support Hillary just because she’s a woman, and then call me sexist because I criticize her on her position on the issues, are perfect examples of how people don’t think, don’t evaluate the facts and evidence before making a decision as important as choosing who will be the next president of the United States.

I’ve been called many things; some of which are unfit for print in a PG rated article. People have called me intolerant, opinionated, arrogant even; all of which I will accept as there are times when one needs to be intolerant and opinionated. Edmund Burke once said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” If I do not speak out against the evil that I see spreading across our land like a plague then I am just as guilty as those who are actually perpetrating this evil if I sit back and remain silent about it.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but just because you are entitled to one does not mean that everyone has to agree with it; especially when it is based upon faulty information or poor judgment. Why should I give anyone’s opinion any consideration when they are unable to back it up with anything other than emotional rhetoric?

Honest and open debate is how ideas are discussed among civilized people in a free world. But when one begins criticizing another with terms like racist, sexist, or all the other phobias used by the politically correct crowd to silence facts and evidence, I can only assume that these people have no facts to support their opinion and therefore must rely upon insults in the hope of silencing those who question those beliefs.

I’ve lost friends when I’ve questioned them too harshly over their support for a particular candidate or their support for one political party over the other. People do not like it when the light is shown upon the hypocrisy of their political party, or its integrity is called into question. Yet I deal solely in facts, and if the facts prove that one party is hypocritical and dishonest, I’m going to voice my opinion on it. If you can’t handle the facts, too bad!

As long as people continue to place party over principle they will continue to fight amongst each other without ever seeing the real problem; that both parties are bought and paid for by the same special interests and that, although they may have differing political platforms, on the big issues they are just the same.

It’s just as Georgetown professor Carroll Quigley wrote in his book Tragedy and Hope, “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”

When George Washington refused a third term as president and retired to private life he sent out a letter to the American people that became a presidential tradition; the Presidential Farewell Address. In his letter Washington stated, “However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

In today’s modern world, unless you are a self made billionaire like Donald Trump, you cannot get elected without the support of your respective political party. The cost of running a campaign makes it next to impossible for anyone to run for office without the support of one of the two parties. But, neither party will support those who do not toe the party line in regards to the issues. This became apparent to me when I sought out campaign literature and materials from the Republican Party for Ron Paul in 2008 and they refused to provide any. It seemed that even with all the grassroots support Dr. Paul was garnering they would rather see a Democrat win the presidency than support someone who might rock the boat and challenge the status quo in our nation’s capital.

Since people are so enamored with football, let me use another football analogy to try to get my point across. Let’s say you are an extremely wealthy person and you own a football stadium and not one, but two football teams. Do you care who wins when your two teams compete against each other, or are you more concerned with how many seats you fill in your stadium; how much beer you sell, and how much fan merchandise you sell? You turn a profit no matter what the outcome of the game is.

Well that’s what our elections have become, a game in which those who funnel the money into the political parties are the owners and they don’t care who wins because the overall policy of our government never changes. The debt keeps going up, the wars keep going on, the invasion of our privacy continues, our government becomes more authoritarian, and our rights continue to be diminished no matter whether there is a Republican or a Democrat sitting in the Oval Office. Can’t you see that?

That is why our Founders feared and despised political parties; they understood that it would take principle and values out of the election process and allow for those who sought only to control the nation the power to pick and choose only those candidates who were beholden to their agendas.

Most Americans are unable to even explain the origin of the political parties in this country, or the history of the party they most closely affiliate themselves with. They are more swayed by current party platforms; single issues a party supports, and catchy campaign slogans than they are the principles upon which this once great nation was founded.

In a letter to Francis Hopkinson, dated March 13, 1789, Thomas Jefferson writes, “I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

Political parties in America evolved from the disagreement between two ways of thinking; those who felt that our Constitution said what it meant and meant what it said, and those who believed it contained certain implied powers that, although not specifically enumerated, still existed.

In the beginning these two differing ideologies aligned themselves between two men; Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. Both these men served as cabinet members under George Washington; with Jefferson serving as Secretary of State and Hamilton serving as Secretary of the Treasury. Having served with Washington during the Revolution, Hamilton had Washington’s ear and therefore was more inclined to side with Hamilton when disagreements arose between his two cabinet members.

Jefferson believed in a limited government with a firm adherence to Constitutional powers and States rights, while Hamilton believed in a much stronger central government with a corresponding loss of State authority.

It’s ironic that the platform espoused by Democrats today contradicts that of the original Democratic-Republican Party led by Jefferson, and later Andrew Jackson. The Democrats of our nations early years were traditionally in the South and they were, for the most part, the slave owning States. That’s a far cry from today’s Democrats who traditionally stand for the rights of minorities and the social programs designed to aid those in need.

But the fact is that the origins of today’s political parties can be traced back to whether our Constitution gave our government specific powers and nothing more, or whether it implied a whole host of unspecified powers government could exercise.

If you really wanted to think about this the whole history of political parties pre dates our government’s going into operation and can be tied to the Federalists and Anti-Federalists arguing for or against the ratification of our Constitution.

One group sought to keep power where it belonged, with the people and their direct representatives in the States, while the other sought to centralize power in a national form of government, taking away from the rights and sovereignty of the States.

Regardless of what you have been taught, that is all the Civil War was about; the fact that at that particular moment in history a segment of our nation felt that it was left with no other choice other than to sever the ties which bound them to the Union and secure to themselves a form of government which best secured their rights as sovereign States.

You have to remember, as evil as the practice of slavery was, it was condoned by the Founders when they wrote the Constitution. The government created by that document could not tell the States not to own slaves, nor could it prohibit new states from adopting the institution of slavery once admitted into the Union. The ONLY reason our government sought to prohibit slavery in newly admitted States was to limit the control and influence held by the slave owning Democrat States.

It was the Republican Party, led by Abraham Lincoln, who sought to force the Southern slave owning States into a continued state of submission to the control and authority of the federal government. Had Lincoln let the South secede in peace there would have been no war; it’s that simple. Whether or not the Confederacy would have thrived or whether by allowing the South to secede would have led to other States seceding for various other reasons is beside the point, the government created by the Constitution had absolutely no authority to use force to compel adherence to the Union.

Since then, with the loss of the South and the corresponding loss of States Rights, the government’s power and authority has increased by leaps and bounds; with the resulting government we have today being the very thing our Founders feared would happen when the people become universally corrupt in their principles.

It does not matter which party controls Congress or whether the President is a Democrat or a Republican, our government grows bigger and bigger and we become less free with every law they pass.

It doesn’t matter if you are Republican or Democrat, just name one piece of legislation that your party has overturned to restore one small piece of our freedom to us. Can’t do it? That’s because neither party cares to reduce the size of government, only to increase its size. Both parties, in reality, have become Federalist in nature in that they believe that government is entitled to all kinds of unspecified powers and that any move to reduce it poses a threat to them and their control over us.

And that’s the whole point of this; government was NEVER established to control us. It was established to represent the people in the overall management of this country; nothing more, nothing less. The power wielded government was granted to them by the people and it is limited and enumerated. Whenever government oversteps that power and authority its acts become usurpation and tyrannical.

Tyranny comes in all shapes and sizes. It does not matter if tyranny is Fascist in nature or socialist, it is still tyranny. The same applies here; it does not matter if tyranny is clocked in Democratic principles or Republican principles, it is still tyranny.

But you can’t see that, you are so blinded by party loyalty that the truth evades you. It is also why I am sickened and disgusted with most people; especially when I hear them espousing their views on the political candidates and their merits. What merits might I ask? I don’t see a candidate running for office that has the virtue and integrity that men like Jefferson and Patrick Henry had in their big toes.

There is a quote that has been attributed to Albert Einstein that I believe aptly applies to an overwhelming majority of Americans today. It states, “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not so sure about the universe.”

When you won’t face the facts that nary a candidate running has any intention of adhering to the principles upon which our nation was founded, then I can only come to the conclusion that the truth means nothing to you and that you are basing your decisions as to whom you will vote for upon emotional responses to campaign catch phrases, gender issues, or some other idiotic belief.

It also means that you have no idea what America once stood for and you cannot tell me that you are voting for what is best for America. When you allow government free reign to impose laws upon us that violate the Constitution simply because you like the benefits these laws provide, you have no right to complain when government begins enacting laws which violate rights you care about. You either stand for Constitutional government or you stand for tyranny. But this belief that a Republican tyranny is better than a Democrat tyranny, or vice versa, is the stupidest damned thing I’ve ever heard and I’ve heard some pretty stupid things in my life.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

What Will It Take For You To Believe?

WARNING:
MAY CAUSE YOU TO QUESTION YOUR TRUST OF GOVERNMENT

Have you ever heard the phrase just the tip of the iceberg? It comes from the fact that the part of an iceberg you actually see is just a small part of the entire iceberg; as typically 2/3 of the iceberg is underwater and therefore not visible. When used as a colloquialism or as a metaphor it means that what you actually see or hear is just a small fragment of what is really going on.

People, most of them anyway, have this deep seated need to basically trust others. Otherwise, if they didn’t, they would become cynical and paranoid. The problem is that people can become too trusting. Trust should only be given when it is earned. If someone has proven that they are untrustworthy then it will be a long and hard road for them to regain my trust.

Nowhere is trust not to be given unconditionally then when speaking of our government. Our government, or I should say your government because I claim no allegiance to or support for it any longer, lies to you routinely and as a matter of fact. It also keeps many secrets from you which, if you found out about, would cause you to become just as conspiracy theory minded as I am. If you learned just half the truth about what your government is doing you might become just like me. Frightening thought, isn’t it?

Government, and many of the private organizations which do business with government, rely upon the self chosen ignorance of the masses to maintain a veil of secrecy over the things they are doing. While I accept that a certain degree of secrecy is necessary in order to keep proprietary information from falling into the wrong hands, it should not be used as an excuse to hide unethical in inhumane acts.

The problem today is that for generations now the people of America have been taught not to think, not to question those in positions of authority. Former Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas once said, “Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us?” It’s a legitimate question if you ask me, and one which far too many people are reluctant to consider.

Where one, or a large part of the country for that matter, to begin seriously questioning the things our government does, or tells us, then it would lead to them discovering things the government simply cannot allow to become public knowledge. Were this to happen public confidence in government, already at an all time low, would erode to the point of being non-existent.

It has been said that George H.W. Bush once told Sarah McClendon, a White House Press Corps journalist, “If the American people knew what we have done, they would string us up from the lamp posts.” Whether or not Bush actually said that has never been proven, but knowing of the things our government HAS done leads me to believe it is quite plausible.

There is another old saying that I think you should hear; it says, “Do as I say, not as I do.” That too applies to our government. They pass all these laws which we are required to obey. They have the means, and the willingness to use force to compel obedience to the laws they pass. Yet the Constitution is the law, written and ratified by the people, which created government and gave it its powers. When the government violates the Constitution by overstepping its powers what recourse do we have?

Don’t give me that garbage about voting them out of office either. When we violate the law we can be fined, imprisoned, and executed even depending on the severity of the crime we are accused of committing. Do we have the reciprocal authority to do the same to those who are nothing more than public servants? What agency would hear our case, enforce our will, should we seek to penalize a public official for violating their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution? Hmmm…

Sure, Congress has the power to impeach and to censure those who represent us, but that’s like giving the fox the power to guard the chicken coop. Nixon, as corrupt as he was, had the decency to step down when the charges against him became such that he lost the trust of the people in this country. Yet he never served a day in jail or paid a fine for his criminal acts. Today our government routinely breaks its oath and lies to the American public, AND NOTHING IS DONE ABOUT IT!!!

I have never asked anyone to take my word for the things I present in my articles; I have always suggested that you do your own research. There is another old saying which states that something given is not appreciated as much as something earned. If I just hand this information over to you then you may not appreciate it as much as if you were to go out and do some digging to find it for yourself. Therefore the Russian proverb, Doveryai, no proveryai, (trust but verify), sounds like the prudent course of action.

I know that was a lengthy opening statement, but I needed to preface the meat and potatoes portion of this article to get you into the mind frame not to take my word for anything I am about to say; to go out and see for yourselves if what I’m about to say is true. The truth is out there people, but you have to be willing to seek it out, and more importantly you need to be willing to accept it when you finally come face to face with it.

Let’s start with something current; the events that recently transpired in Turkey. If you’ve been watching the news you are well aware of the recent coup attempt in Turkey. But, you may not have heard former Homeland Security Task Force co-chair Fran Townsend say that Turkey’s porous borders contributed to the attacks. By Turkey having such lax control over who gets into Turkey from its neighbors, Ms Townsend implied that outsiders could have infiltrated into Turkey and joined in the opposition to President Erdogan.

Is that so!?! What about our borders? What about the violence that occurs daily in America due to those who enter our country illegally? Our border, especially our Southern border, is about as porous as it gets with an estimated 790,000 entering the U.S. annually.

In February of this year the Obama administration basically ordered the U.S. Border Patrol to ‘stand down.’ U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are now being told to release any and all illegal aliens caught entering the U.S.; not to detain them or even order them to appear at deportation hearings. Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council declared, “We might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether.”

Yet our government has the gall to tell Turkey that the problems it is experiencing is partly due to porous borders? When are they going to have the courage to turn that keen eyesight inwards and see how many problems our own porous borders are creating right here in the good ole US of A?

What about my favorite subject; gun control? Our government repeatedly says that there is no need for Americans to own assault weapons; although the definition of what constitutes an assault weapon continually evolves. I dislike, no I abhor the phrase assault weapon. I like to think of them as liberty preservation weapons; as that is what the 2nd Amendment is all about, the ability of the people to preserve their liberty from encroachment by their own government.

Yet how much money does the US spend annually arming other countries? We are not sending these countries single shot rifles and pistols either, the weapons these countries get are the same weapons of war that our owned armed forces carry into battle. Many of these arms go towards, what our government calls, freedom fighters who oppose dictatorial regimes. Yet can it not be said that those of us who cherish our liberty are also freedom fighters and ought to be as well armed as any other freedom fighter across the globe?

They hypocrisy and double standards our government displays on these two examples alone ought to be enough to convince anyone with half a functioning brain to begin asking what else our government is guilty of.

How do you think the American people would feel if China or Russia began funding and arming American’s who sought to overthrow their duly elected government? You’d be pretty pissed off at China or Russia, wouldn’t you? Well, how about our involvement in the overthrowing of legitimately leaders across the globe?

Hopefully your memories are good enough to remember the ousting of Saddam in Iraq and Gaddafi in Libya, but do you remember the CIA led coup which saw Prime Minister Mosaddegh ousted from office in 1953? (Google the TPAJAX Project to find out more.)

Are you aware that this coup was all about control of Iran’s oil fields? Masaddegh had sought to audit the books of the Anglo Iranian Oil Company, part of British Petroleum, and when they refused to allow an audit of their books the Prime Minister expelled all representatives of the AIOC and nationalized Iran’s oil industry. This put a deep dent in the pockets of BP and lead to the CIA and British Intelligence funding and orchestrating a coup which led to the installation of the Shah of Iran as leader. The Shah was friendlier towards business interests and also was brutal in his treatment of the people of Iran. It was due to the Shah’s brutal treatment of his people which saw the Ayatollah Khomeini rise into power; leading to the Iranian hostage crisis under the Carter administration.

Oh, but it is unpatriotic to question our foreign policy and the arming of our ‘friends’, friends who later turn around and become problems which we must deal with. Noriega, Saddam, Osama, and now these freedom fighters turned ISIS terrorists all have at their roots U.S. support and meddling in the internal affairs of other sovereign nations.

When will we learn? And if that weren’t enough to get you questioning your support for your government there are other things that should. America is very fond of tossing the accusation of human rights violations around; yet again, do we have the courage to take that looking glass and turn it inwards?

Ever hear of the Tuskegee Experiments? I didn’t think so. For 40 years, between the years of 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Government, the US Dept of Health to be specific, conducted experiments on the way untreated syphilis progressed in African American men in rural Alabama.

Under the guise of ‘free health care’ the Dept of Health monitored the progression of syphilis with these men. None of them were told they had the disease and the cure was not given them once it became known that penicillin would cure syphilis. Untreated syphilis can cause damage to the brain, nerves, eyes, heart, liver, bones and joints. It can cause difficulty in coordinating muscle movements, paralysis, blindness, mental illness, and even death.

These men were nothing more than human guinea pigs to be studied by our government. And we have the audacity to say that America is not guilty of human rights violations.

Then there was MK Ultra, an experimental program funded by the CIA in which American and Canadians were experimented on to test theories of mind control and methods of torture to extract information from our enemies. Under MK Ultra people were given LSD, submitted to sensory deprivation and hypnosis, even torture; all to further the CIA’s study of the human mind and how to manipulate it.

Then there was the testing done by our military upon its own members at Edgwood Arsenal in Maryland. From 1948 to 1975 the U.S. Military subjected its own people to various nerve agents, psychochemicals and other irritants; just to see how they performed and what treatments could be developed.

According to General Accounting Office reports at least 7,800 US servicemen served as lab rats for these evil bastards.

Tip of the iceberg folks. These are just a few examples of how duplicitous and evil our own government is; yet you still continue to support it because to question it’s authority is unpatriotic. If you ask me it is unpatriotic to blindly support it without first asking yourself if what it does is legitimate and duly granted powers found in the Constitution.

You question my sanity because I believe in conspiracy theories like the 9/11 truth movement and the imposition of martial law and the movement of U.S. citizens to FEMA Camps. I have long warned that UN Forces would be brought to the US to help impose martial law upon the people of this country…and you laughed at me; called me a nutcase.

Well eat this: On July 13, 2016 it was reported in both the Military Times and on the fair and balanced FOX News that UN military troops may soon be arriving on US soil to see action on American soil. This comes after our government announced support for a “set of principles that give a green light for U.N. peacekeeping troops and police to use force to protect civilians in armed conflicts…” U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power told attendees at a UN Meeting that she was PROUD and HUMBLED to be included in the new agenda.

What agenda might that be Ms Powers?

Oh, but this is all harmless; our government has our best interests in mind and wouldn’t do anything to violate the trust we’ve placed in it. Yeah, keep believing that why don’t you?

Besides the fact that the war in Iraq was more about control over Iraq’s oil and the installation of a central bank in Iraq, there was also the fact that after we went in and devastated Iraq’s infrastructure certain companies, specifically Kellogg, Brown Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, was awarded millions in contracts to go in and rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure. Is it a coincidence that former Vice-president Dick Cheney just happened to be the former CEO of Halliburton, and that Cheney got a $34 million bonus when he left Halliburton to become Bush’s VP selection?

I don’t believe in coincidences; not any more. I may be too jaded, too cynical, but I think these things are well thought out in advance and well planned schemes to put people into positions of power who can influence things in our government to benefit their buddies, the special interests.

You aren’t taught these things in school and the news media conveniently forgets they happened in their reporting of the news. But you can do your own research to see who is telling you the whole truth; me or some high paid news anchor who reads from a prepared script.

John F. Kennedy once said, “We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”

Our government fears the truth; that it may come out of the darkness and shed light upon all its criminal and unethical acts. Maybe Bush was right, if the people found out the truth about what it was doing they’d all be hanging from lamp posts at the end of a rope. Maybe that’s what is needed; as it sure as hell doesn’t seem that our government is going to provide us with any justice.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Mulder Was Wrong

Over the course of the past weekend I sat down to watch Season 2 of the old television show the X-Files. I was always a huge fan of the show when it aired on TV, but due to my work schedule and frequent deployments overseas, I missed months of it at a time. So I decided to begin purchasing the entire series on DVD.

As I was sitting there watching it this weekend I noticed something Agent Mulder, played by David Duchovny, kept saying, “The people deserve to know the truth.” Like Agent Mulder I have been on a quest for the truth as well; a quest to learn the true history of my country and its system of government.

I have books out the Yazoo containing the speeches and documents from the era that produced our Declaration of Independence and Constitution and I also have over 200 documents saved to my computer going all the way up through the founding of our Republic to the Civil War.

While I am not as well educated as some, I would be comfortable wagering that I know more about the history of my country than 80% of the rest of the people who inhabit this country. Years ago when I began scribbling out my first pathetic attempts at articles I was under the misguided impression that if I condensed what I was learning into short articles that the people I gave them to would be overjoyed to learn the truths I was learning.

I was wrong, people do not care about the truth; at least not when it comes to the subject matter I write about.

I’m not saying everyone in this country is a bad person, but I am saying that they choose to continue to believe a lie rather than face, or seek out even, the truth. To me, aside from lying, self chosen ignorance is the greatest of character flaws. To reject the truth simply because it threatens your fragile beliefs shows me that most Americans have a weak sense of self and are unwilling to question long standing beliefs.

Everything I write about can be backed up by historical fact; the people I quote actually did say the things I say they did. Yet the people of today choose to ignore what these men, long since dead, choosing instead to believe the lies and rhetoric fed to them by men any thinking person could see are blatantly violating their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution.

This entire hubbub over Trump vs. Hillary is a perfect example. The GOP faithful are currently holding their convention; hoping to pull together enough support to defeat Hillary in the upcoming presidential election. But to quote Ms Clinton, “What difference does it make?”

Is Hillary worse than Trump? She most certainly is; but it is only a matter of degrees. You people look at things from your narrow perspectives of your personal prejudices or party loyalty. I look at them from the perspective of how well a candidate will adhere to the powers granted them by the Constitution; and the limits imposed upon them by it and the Bill of Rights.

If you took a scale from 1 to 10 with a 1 being a firm adherence to the Constitution, Trump might be a 6 or a 7 and Hillary is probably a 9 or 10. Both have said that they hope to do things that clearly show neither one cares about the limits the Constitution imposes upon the office they currently seek. Yet the people of this country are so caught up in the freak show that our elections have become that they don’t see the truth that is in plain sight.

I’m sickened by what I’m witnessing in my country, yet I’m powerless to do anything about it; not when people keep voting for the same manner of corrupt politicians who’ve sold their souls to special interests and banking institutions for the chance to ‘sit at the big table’ and govern over us peasants.

Our country was not founded so that we could be governed over by anyone! It was founded so that men, and women, would be free to pursue their hopes and dreams without governmental interference. There were no promises of success or of governmental aid if we fail; it was up to each person to work hard and accept what life tossed at them.

In short, we, and we alone, were responsible for our own safety, our own security, and our own prosperity. Americans decry the loss of good jobs because our corporations have moved their facilities overseas; yet they flock to stores like WalMart in droves to buy these goods which are produced by the people who took the jobs they cry about losing.

If there is any proof that the American people don’t think; there it is.

I honestly don’t know what else I can do to get people to think. The old saying you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink certainly applies. I can provide all the information I have, both in my head and backed up on my computer; yet if the people refuse to utilize their brains for their God-given purposes then what good is the information I provide? Sometimes I feel like I’m trying to shove a wet spaghetti noodle into a brick.

I’ve come to the conclusion that, as fictional as he was, Agent Mulder was wrong; the people don’t deserve to know the truth. The truth is out there, and if they wanted to know it badly enough they would have got off their lazy butts and found it themselves. Instead they post pictures on Facebook, watch hour after hour of sporting events, or search for imaginary Pokémon with their cell phones.

I’m just tired of repeating myself with my words falling upon dear ears and closed minds. I have a vacation coming up where I will be out of the country visiting my wife’s family in the Philippines. Maybe when I return I will feel rejuvenated and recharged. Until that time I’m tired…dog tired of sitting here day after day wasting my time on people who simply don’t care about the truth.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Find A Mirror (Do You See A Patriot, or Do You See A Sheep?)

With the 2016 presidential election just around the corner, and the field being narrowed down to two candidates; the billionaire bigmouth and the pathological liar, the people of America are once again faced with the choice of either a Republican candidate who doesn’t understand the Constitution, or a Democrat candidate who doesn’t care about the Constitution. Yet the people of this country will vote for these candidates by the millions; thinking that their choice is the best choice for America.

It is obvious, at least for anyone who has been paying attention, that neither of the two presumptive nominees have made any statements about adhering to the limited powers granted government by the Constitution, nor to the powers granted the office which they seek. It is also obvious by the way the people of this country are falling into place behind their party’s presumptive candidate that the people of this country don’t care what the Constitution says either.

These candidates have been campaigning for quite some time now; all making promises to do this and do that. May I ask exactly how they intend to fulfill these promises when the office of the president has no power to enact law?

Article 1 of the Constitution clearly states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” What this means is that the power to make laws falls within the purview of Congress, not the president. The president may choose to reject a law sent to him by Congress, but he cannot, of his own volition, enact law.

Article 2 of the Constitution defines limitations upon the president’s authority in regards to enacting law, stating the he merely has the authority to “… recommend to their [Congress] Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

All of these people, from the president down to the Congress, take an oath to uphold the Constitution. This oath is sacred and binding, and to violate it is the gravest of offenses and a serious breach of the trust granted them by the people whom they represent. But none of this matters if the people of this country do not care what the Constitution says any more than those whom they elect.

For nearly 8 years I’ve sat here and listened to Republican friends bemoan the abuses of power by Barack Obama. Throughout this time where was their precious Republican Party, or Tea Party for that matter?

At any time Congress could have rejected the president’s proposed budget plans, slashing funding for programs they believed to be unconstitutional…but they did nothing! Sure, John ‘Bonehead’ Boehner made a big noise and put on a good show opposing the president, but when talk of a government shutdown caused the people of this country to panic, Boehner caved and gave Obama what he wanted.
Whatever happened to standing up for what is right no matter the consequences?

Not only that, the Congress has the power to impeach a sitting president. If these so-called conservatives really cared about supporting and defending the Constitution why haven’t they impeached Barack Obama?

Yet people still have faith that this time things will be different, this time Trump will make the needed changes to make America great again. At what cost might I ask? Even if the proposals made by Trump would be good for America, he has absolutely no legislative authority to enact them; not without becoming just as dictatorial as Obama has been anyway. With Trump’s reputation as a bully and someone who does not take kindly to losing, a Trump presidency could conceivably be far worse than the past 8 years of Obama, at least when it comes to the expansion of powers granted the Executive.

Yet none of this has even crossed the minds of those who support Trump. I’m not saying Hillary would be better, far from it, but I am saying that Trump may not be the good thing everyone claims he is.

People place way too much importance upon the election of a president, while basically ignoring the elections to Congress; and that’s where the real problem is. Sure, presidents can be corrupt, but if Congress had any virtue whatsoever it could prevent a sitting president from doing any harm to our country, or to the Constitution.

In 1877 President James Garfield declared, “Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature…. If the next centennial does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.”

What that means is that Congress is a mirror which reflects the soul of our nation; its values, its beliefs, and its morality. If Congress, or government as a whole for that matter, is corrupt it is because the values and morals of the people of this country are corrupt as well.

Samuel Adams was among those who were the most ardent proponents for independence and a staunch believe in the inherent rights belonging to mankind. Adams once wrote, “He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of this country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man.”

If you’ll notice, Adams makes no mention of voting for a candidate who makes the best sounding promises; he only states that wisdom and virtue are the qualities one should look for when deciding whom to vote for.

Is Hillary virtuous? Please, do not make me slap you by saying yes. Is Trump virtuous? That remains to be seen, but it is clear that he hopes to do things which the office of the president is not constitutionally authorized to do. That fact alone causes me to doubt whether he meets the qualifications of being virtuous. The end does not justify the means; not when it comes at the cost of an erosion of the Constitutional limitations upon power granted.

Aside from being the father of the American dictionary, Noah Webster was also a founding father who once said, “When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, ‘just men who will rule in the fear of God.’ The preservation of [our] government depends on the faithful discharge of this Duty; if the citizens neglect their Duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the Laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizen will be violated or disregarded. If [our] government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the Divine Commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the Laws.”

People constantly talk about how divided our government is along party lines, or how corrupt it is; beholden to special interests. Yet who elects these people? We do, over and over and over again. How many members of Congress are there who are serving their second, third…fourth term; just because the people in that Congressional District keep voting them back into office. If those who represent us in our government are corrupt it is because we put them there time and time again.

In a letter published in the Public Advertiser, 1749, Samuel Adams said, “Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”

Those who represent us in government do so only by a grant of power given them by the people. At any time the people could choose to withdraw that grant of power and there is absolutely nothing our government could legally do to retain it. I’m not saying they would not try, but being as the power they hold was granted them for certain specific things, if the government oversteps the limitations placed upon it, it is our right to withdraw that grant of power and abolish the government.

That is a fundamental principle upon which our nation was founded; that government derives its just powers from the consent of those it governs. Yet our Declaration of Independence also states, “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.”

None of these principles will do a bit of good though if the people of this country care more about party than they do the limits imposed upon government by the Constitution. None of these principles will do any good if the people care more about comfort and security than they do for the perilous challenge of maintaining their status as free men and women.

Our Founders felt that these principles were worth fighting, dying even, for. The Declaration of Independence closes with the following words, “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.”

If you truly were an American, or believe yourself to be a patriot, you would not sit idly by while one candidate after another abused the powers of the office they hold, nor would you sit idly by while your rights were slowly taken away from you.

Yet were you to ask the average American to tell you four or five of the specific powers granted Congress, or to list five of the rights protected by constitutional amendment, they probably could not do so. Ignorance abounds in this country when it comes to the limitations upon governmental authority; yet these people claim that they have the right to vote, and even make the absurd claim that they are making informed decisions because they watched a presidential debate or two?

In 1779 Dr. Richard Price wrote, “In America, every inhabitant has in his house (as part of his furniture) a book on law and government, to enable him to understand his civil rights; a musket to enable him to defend those rights; and a Bible to enable him to understand his religion.”

People today do not want to read about rights or limits upon governmental power; they are more concerned with sporting events or chasing imaginary characters around with their cell phones. With the continued push to pass more restrictive gun laws it is obvious that much of America also has no desire to pick up a gun and defend their rights. And with the move to remove God from public discourse it is obvious that we have forsaken God and put our trust in men.

And people wonder why this country is so screwed up; when all they have to do to find the answer is find a mirror.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

So Be It

Authors Note: I had not planned on writing anything today. I was in the process of converting all my historical documents from Word files into PDF files when I came across the inspiration for this. Oh well, there’s always tomorrow…

I just saw a short news clip about protests in Dallas showing these idiots blocking a major highway chanting, “Take away their guns” in regards to the police. While I have series issues regarding the police enforcing unconstitutional laws and abusing their authority, police do serve a purpose and to expose them to danger without leaving them the means of defending themselves is akin to sending our young men and women off to war without the weapons to fight it.

These protestors are a bunch of dreamers who believe that we can make the world a beautiful place, where there is no violence and we all live in absolute safety with no guns being needed to fend off evil. The truth is the world has always been, and will always be, filled with people meaning to do you harm. You have but two choices; either take responsibility for protecting yourself and your property or transfer that responsibility onto the shoulders of others; in this case the police.

Honestly, I’d like to take all that facial recognition software the government has and identify each and every one of those protesters, then add their names to a list which blocks them access to the 911 Emergency System. Let THEM accept full responsibility if someone breaks into their home, or seeks to do them harm.

Unfortunately, most of these protesters are of the ilk that they are the first ones to cry ‘Where’s a cop when you need one?’ They decry the abuses of power and authority by the police, but then they also depend upon them when they find themselves in danger.

I’m of the belief that it is my Natural Right to defend, not only myself, but my family, my property, and yes, my liberty, with whatever means available to me. If anyone threatens any of those things I can defend them without seeking permission from ‘government’ or facing penalties for ‘taking the law into my own hands.’

That concept lies at the heart of what it means to be truly free; accepting responsibility for your own safety and security. Unfortunately, there are those, including our government, who seek to deprive us all of that fundamental right; the right to defend our lives, our property and our liberty.

Through limiting our right to own, or carry firearms for our own personal defense, our by enacting laws that make it a crime to use those firearms if your life is not imminently in danger, they are depriving us all of a fundamental right.

Nearly 250 years ago Samuel Adams, one of the most outspoken proponents of liberty, wrote the following, “Among the Natural Rights of the Colonists are these First. a Right to Life; Secondly to Liberty; thirdly to Property; together with the Right to support and defend them in the best manner they can–Those are evident Branches of, rather than deductions from the Duty of Self Preservation, commonly called the first Law of Nature.”

What people don’t understand is that the Laws of Nature, or Natural Law, is not affected by the laws enacted by men; they are eternal and unchanging. Therefore, what was true in 1772 is true today. Those who would seek to deny us these Natural Rights only seek to enslave us; and those who willingly seek to surrender those rights are fools; for they seek to enslave themselves.

When you shirk your individual responsibility, and place it upon someone else, you place yourself in a state of dependency upon those to whom you’ve given the responsibility of providing things for you, or keeping you safe.

Thomas Jefferson once penned the following, “Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.” Subservience is defined as too submissive or eager to follow the wishes or orders of others, while venality is defined as open to persuasion by corrupt means, especially bribery.

When you place yourself into a state of dependency, essentially giving up your freedom, you tend not to do or say anything that would cause you to lose the benefits or safety provided by those you’ve surrendered your responsibility to. There is a lot of truth to the old saying ‘Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.’

I’m all for the police and sheriffs as long as they do not violate my rights by enforcing unconstitutional laws. The problem is that many of them justify their actions by saying they are simply following orders. This goes for the military as well.

Look at how local Law Enforcement, along with the National Guard, went house to house after Hurricane Katrina and confiscated the firearms of those who remained in New Orleans, and arrested anyone who refused to surrender their guns. In doing so they deprived these people of their fundamental right to protect themselves and their property.

But these protesters who want the cops to be deprived of their weapons are the worst of fools and hypocrites, as they are likely to be the first to call upon those same cops when they find themselves facing danger.

This whole issue of disarming certain segments of society is wrought with so much hypocrisy that it makes me want to vomit blood. It is unconscionable to deprive anyone of the right of defending themselves; including those we’ve placed the burden of keeping us safe upon. Yet many within the law enforcement community seek to deny us that right; while they go around carrying weapons which the law forbids us from owning.

At the same time we have lawmakers and celebrities who seek to see laws passed which further restrict our right to keep and bear arms; all the while they have armed bodyguards protecting them. Does the phrase double standard mean anything at all to these people?

I will NEVER surrender my guns, or my right to defend my life, my property, and my liberty. As Andrew Fletcher once said, “Arms are the only true badge of liberty. The possession of arms is the distinction of a free man from a slave.” As long as I live and breathe I will fight to be among those who actively seek to remain free. If that places you and I at odds; so be it.

Posted in General | 1 Comment