Your Choice: EBay Government or Republic

There’s good news out of the Second Louisiana Purchase.

The corruption that permeates every level of our government is now clearly out in the open.

Senator Mary Landrieu’s sale of her vote to allow the PROcare (PelosiReidObama) bill to come to the Senate floor for $300 million dollars in aid to her state is so blatant, so obvious, so distasteful that it just can’t be ignored.

If someone walks up to you on election day and hands you $10 to vote for their candidate they are guilty of a Federal crime. But if Senate Majority leader Reid shovels $1 for every man, woman and child in the country to a senator for her vote it’s just good politics.

Why would anyone in Congress ever support a bill until the last minute, when their vote is needed. Everyone know that the bidding gets more active and that prices soar just before an EBay auction closes.

Incredibly, that $300 million was just to get the bill on the floor. How much is her vote worth when it comes to actual passage?

Don’t kid yourself though — this practice in one form or another — outright bribery or pork barrel projects inserted by Congressional leadership into bills (they have the power to stop it) has been going on for decades…by both parties…so Republicans really shouldn’t have  self-satisfied grins on their faces.

The pressure to “bring home the bacon” is enormous on every member of Congress. Opposition candidates will point to the failure to do so in the next election.

Here’s the harsh reality. We are to blame. You, me, our neighbors. We feed the corruption, bid the price of everything government does higher and higher in an auction frenzy.

Unless you live in Louisiana the $300 million bribe is blatant corruption. To the folks in Louisiana, the millions and millions spent in John Murtha’s southwestern Pennsylvania district is a waste.

One state’s pork is another man’s waste and unless we are willing to forgo our elected officials getting us our “fair share” it will never end.

Unless we, the citizens, the voters, the taxpayers scream “ENOUGH” and start thinking as Americans about what is best for our country the auctions will go on and on and on with ever increasing prices paid by us to us — minus, of course, the incredibly huge fees taken out by the government which runs the corruption.

The next time an incumbent tells you how much “bacon” he brought to the district or state, tell him, “You’re fired.” It would be nice if we had intelligent, thoughtful, honest candidates to replace them with but in the absence of that we can still make it their final term in office.

Perhaps, if we actually stop repeatedly re-electing 90% of the garbage we have representing us, they’ll stop fighting to put pork into every bill. Imagine the day when Reid or Pelosi goes to a senator or congressman and our elected official says, “No, thanks.”

Then, perhaps, we’ll return to the republic we were given by the founding fathers. I hope I live long enough to see it.

Words That Influence are the Words to Use

Bear with me for just a couple of moments while I, so to speak, set the stage.

Words have two kinds of meanings — denotative and connotative.

Simply put, the denotative (primary) meaning of a word like fireplace is pretty straightforward. It’s a structure in a house where you can burn wood or coal or gas.

The connotative (secondary) definition of the word however is filled with nuance and meaning — a lot of which depends on your own personal experiences. Fireplace conjures up a feeling of warmth, coziness, home, family, perhaps even popcorn.

On the Federal level alone we have 468 elections to win in 2010 — all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate. And, while the polls say more Americans associate themselves with conservative thinking it isn’t enough to win. We must sway the independent voters, those in the middle, who gave the presidency to both Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama.

Liberal is not a term in favor, having come to mean tax and spend and weakness on national defense. That’s one reason Hillary Clinton decided she was a progressive. Progressive sounds much better — you know, forward thinking. So don’t call them that.

There’s a third term, statist: a belief in concentrating extensive power and control over economic and other activities in the hands of government — and here’s the kicker — at the expense of personal liberty.

My suggested term of endearment is Liberal-Statist.

Just as with liberal, the word capitalist now has a negative connotation. It fosters images of fat-cats in their private jets, mansions, the excesses of Wall Street and a disregard for the average working citizen.

We conservatives, on the other hand, want to restore the spirit of American entrepreneurship and free-enterprise that built the country into the richest nation with more citizens enjoying a higher standard of living than any country in the history of the world.

No one — not liberals and certainly not conservatives — want to have their actions controlled by the government. When we talk about redistribution let’s be honest, 40 percent of the populations doesn’t pay any Federal taxes so, naturally, they aren’t too upset about raising taxes on the other 60 percent and especially not on those making $250,000 or more a year.

So present these Liberal-Statist programs in terms that will affect them, will control their actions, will control their choices.

If government gives them health insurance government will control what treatments are covered. Government will control – by deciding how much it will pay doctors for a particular procedure — which doctors will accept the “free” insurance plan. Show them how many medical practices don’t accept Medicare or Medicaid because the reimbursement doesn’t cover the value of the procedure.

Show them that government believes obesity is a major cause of higher medical costs and that the government believes — especially if it is providing the health insurance — that they should be able to dictate what foods and how much you eat and how much exercise you must do.

If government mandates limits on carbon emissions their electricity bills will go up almost $2,000 a year — even President Obama admits that. If they believe the government will help them pay those higher bills, show them that there are mandates to install “smart” meters that control when and how much electricity they can have, control how warm they can keep their homes, control their personal comfort.

Ask any mother — poor, middle class or rich; black, white or hispanic — if they think their children are getting a good education in the public schools. Ask them what they think their child’s future will be like without a good education.

Ask any mother is they want their children to be free to choose what career they pursue in life; want them to be able to succeed to their fullest potential. Ask that mother if she really believes that the government, as the sole provider of student loans, will allow her child to study whatever they want without any regard for what government thinks the country needs.

Ask any mother if she wants to burden her children and her grandchildren (and even her great grandchildren) with so much debt that they will never enjoy the fruits of their labors. Ask if she thinks it’s fair that they will always be enslaved because of our excesses.

Do you really know how much $13,000,000,000 ($13 trillion) is? I can’t begin to fathom a number that big. Political campaigns are lost because candidates don’t make the numbers relevant to the individual. It’s so much more effective to say that everyone will work one day a week for the next 200 years just to pay they interest on the national debt…for one year (I didn’t check those figures it’s just an example).

Everyone who works has FICA and Medicare withheld from their paycheck. Doesn’t matter how little you make or how many dependents you have. If the government increases these two taxes as little as one-half of one percent (.005), even the minimum wage earner will pay almost $3.00 more a week — $150.00 more a year. Ask how they would choose to spend that money if the government didn’t take it away from them.

You’ll notice I’ve ducked the Pro-Choice/Pro-Life debate. Truthfully, I haven’t figured that one out yet. It’s a really, really hot-button issue and conservatives, in everything else, are pro individual choice. At the moment the best I have to offer is to ask the Pro-Choice person to make the wiser, more moral choice and give the child up for adoption.

Anyway, just think about the words you use. Not just what they mean in a purely dictionary sense; think about the image they conjure up in the mind of the person you’re discussing the issues with.

When People Feel They Have Nothing to Lose…

We are a nation severely divided. Who could argue with that fact? The question is why this administration has so polarized the population and seems to have pushed a large portion of the people to a state of near rebellion.

First, some presidential election statistics to set the stage.

2008 - Obama 52%     McCain 48%     Voter Participation: 56.8%

2004 - Bush 52%         Kerry 48%         Voter Participation: 55.3%

2000 - Bush 50%         Gore 50%           Voter Participation: 51.3%

1996 - Clinton 50%     Dole 42%    Perrot 8%  Voter Participation: 49%

1992 - Clinton 43.3%  Bush 37.7%  Perrot 19%    Voter Participation: 55.2%

1988 - Bush 53.4%       Dukakis 45.6%   Voter Participation: 50%

Two things are obvious from these numbers: nearly half the voters are usually unhappy with the outcome and nearly half those eligible to vote don’t bother to participate.

In fact, going all the way back to 1928 only three successful presidential candidates have managed to obtain 60 percent of the votes cast — FDR in 1936 for his second term (60.8), Lyndon Johnson in 1964 (61.1) and Richard Nixon for his second term (60.7) in 1972.

The Bush-Gore race in 2000 with the Florida debacle and the Supreme Court inserting itself into the process might have led to the kind of intense split we see today had it not been for September 11, 2001. Rightfully, the country came together — albeit for only a relatively short period — and the rancor subsided.

Tough economic times certainly play a role. People have lost, or fear losing, their jobs. Those wise enough and disciplined enough have seen their retirement nest eggs shrink, their homes have been devalued and their childrens’ futures jeopardized by mounting public debt.

Several of those factors have existed before. Certainly during the Great Depression of the 1930s unemployment and investment losses were as great as they are today. People then looked to the government for answers and for help…it’s the easy and natural thing to do.

So, what’s different?

Certainly, in this age of virtually instant electronic communications — 24-hour news channels, the internet, social networks — news travels faster and it’s easier to find others who share our anger and our angst.

That’s still not enough to explain it.

What’s different is that people sense an agenda being pushed from the administration and from Congress; they feel ignored when their elected officials turn off their telephones so they don’t have to listen to their constituents; they see White House advisers with radical — almost alien — political viewpoints; and, they are angry when they are called hateful, malicious names by the people they elected to represent them.

In the past people opposed a particular bill — Hillary Clinton’s health care proposals in 1993, for example, or NAFTA or the war in Iraq — without feeling their entire way of life was being threatened.

The Obama administration, whether by design or by hubris, has taken advantage of tough economics and a large majority in both houses of Congress to create the virtually perfect political storm.

Their rhetoric and their proposals are perceived as a threat to the religious, economic and political beliefs of at least half the country. These people are many things but most of them are not stupid. They can read the polls, hear the outcries, understand the nature of the beast they awakened. And yet,  that causes them to exercise no restraint.

Half the people in the country feel they are being stripped of their personal freedoms, of the right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Half the people in the country feel their economic futures are in jeopardy because of ever increasing tax burdens as the government takes from them to provide some service, some benefit, some reward to those who may be less hard-working, less sensible, less productive.

Half the people in the country feel that their government, the one supposedly held in restraint by the provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, is ignoring these documents, is threatening free speech, the freedom of religion, the right to bear arms…on and on and on.

Half the people in the country are truly concerned about government getting between themselves and their doctors, using bad or at least contested science to dramatically raise the cost of everything they buy from basic electric service to the foods they need to feed their families.

Half the people are worried that the government taking over student loans may mean their children and grandchildren won’t be able to choose the career path they want but will be told what the government wants them to study and how long the government wants them to work for it in exchange for financial assistance.

Half the people in the country know, fully understand, that if current spending patterns continue, there is absolutely no way the country — translation we the citizens — can every get out of debt. That we will be indentured servants either to our government or to the Chinese.

Half the people in the country are saddened and sickened by the open signs of corruption in their government; they resent the open purchase of a United State Senator’s vote on a controversial bill with a $100 million grant to her state; they deplore the free pass given to a Congressman who fails to report his income accurately and is excused while they are hounded by the IRS for a couple of hundred dollars; they are — what word is strong enough — shocked that the head of the Treasury Department is a tax cheat; the find it laughable that a committee chair who encouraged, pushed and badgered for bad home loans that contributed mightily to the deflation is in charge of fixing the problem by pushing for more bad loans.

The political campaign promise of hope and change has made half the people lose hope and grow ever more resistant to any change.  It is quickly moving to the point where half the population feels they have nothing more to lose by resisting what they view as a tyrannical government.

They will try to follow the Constitutional mandates, use the freedom of the ballot box to bring a halt to the assault on their liberties, their freedoms, their inalienable rights.

If that fails, if the political parties, and their anointed leaders, ignore them then there is only one course open. History has shown it over and over and over again.

When the people feel they have nothing to lose…the only course is revolution.

A Cockeyed Plan to Shrink Government and Save America

Credit for this idea goes to either (I believe) Lenny Bruce or George Carlin…it would take too long and not be worth the effort to determine where it originated.

Here’s the gist of the comedy routine that contains the seed for shrinking the size of government, saving the country from bureaucrats and actually helping the economy.

Any government employee who eliminates their own job would receive their salary until retirement age at which time, of course, they’d get their fat government pension. The key word is eliminates — makes unnecessary.

Any department head who eliminated his/her entire department would receive their salary for the remainder of their working life plus five percent of the salaries of everyone below them. Plus, of course, those whose jobs were eliminated would get their salaries as well. Pensions, too, of course.

How, you may ask, is that going to save taxpayers money — paying people for not working?

Well, no more government buildings would need to be built, far fewer copiers and desks and computers purchased, no paper clips and millions of reams of paper a year, no government cars and fuel. The list of savings is virtually limitless.

The benefits to the former government employees are obvious. They get full salary without having to travel to the office, don’t need a work wardrobe, can save on child care…so many pluses.

Money saved can be spent on homes, electronics, boats — whatever they like — so the economy gets an immediate shot in the arm. Without tens of thousands of bureaucrats trying to justify their salaries and positions there would be far fewer arcane regulations getting in the way of the American entrepreneur and we’d see a burst of innovation and investment in new ideas creating new jobs and growing our economy tremendously.

And, as either Bruce or Carlin put it, eventually all these people will die and the savings will multiply geometrically.

This plan doesn’t have to be limited just to the Federal government in Washington. Imagine the savings to all 50 states. Hell, it might even save California.

There is one victim in this plan and I won’t weep for the SEIU which will see it’s membership rolls plummet. Who needs a corrupt union to represent them when you’re getting paid not to work?

For most of our history we had relatively small, manageable government — just as the framers of the Constitution envisioned. There are now so many voters employed by government it is virtually impossible to win an election running on a promise to shrink its size.

That’s the genius of this plan, it’s totally voluntary. Honestly, which would you choose, 40 hours a week in a stuffy government office or a chaise lounge in the backyard, a Tuesday morning round of golf or shuffling papers endlessly?

Only total control freaks could have a problem with the plan. Ah, there’s the rub.

The Equality of All People is the Spine of Freedom

That can’t be true!

I mean, I can’t dunk a basketball, haven’t the foggiest idea how computers work, never made money picking stocks to buy. That leaves, at the very least, Shaq, Bill Gates and a good part of Wall Street more equal than I am.

So what were the Founding Fathers talking about with this “all men are created equal” stuff?

There are really just three ways we all can be equal.

First, in the sight of God. Self-explanatory, no expounding necessary.

Second, in the sight of the law.

At least so far we don’t have a separate set of laws for rich and poor (although it must be granted that wealth seems to be able to purchase better legal counsel when one strays). And, after a rather rocky start, we have the same laws for  all races, creeds and genders.

It’s not perfect yet and probably won’t ever be but it’s the best system in the world and we’re constantly working to edge closer and closer to the ideal.

Third, in the protection of our rights.

Wow. Right now that’s getting harder and harder to believe but it’s still true. I’m here, utilizing my freedom of speech, to oppose the current administration; thousands are out there attending Tea Parties and protests on the Capitol steps; guns can still be purchased (more difficultly in some places than in others) and most of us are still free to pursue our personal vision of happiness.

What is happening now, however, is a total bastardization of the principle that “all men are created equal”.

That was never intended — nor is it even remotely possible — to mean that all people should have what anyone else has. That isn’t conceivable in a capitalistic society or, for that matter, has it ever been true under socialism, Marxism or any other form of government or economic system.

John Adams understood this when he wrote: “That all men are born to equal rights is true….But to teach that all men are born with equal powers and faculties, to equal influence in society, to equal property and advantages through life” is a gross fraud.

America used to be called the great melting pot. People came from all corners of the globe. We were all, in our own way, minorities. Even the white Europeans were broken down into minorities — the Irish and Italians — who came in at the lowest rung of society, took the jobs others wouldn’t do, scratched and saved and created better lives, if not for themselves, then for the next generation and the next.

But there was a difference then! Most had one goal. To become productive Americans.

To accomplish this they learned English so they could become citizens, could vote, could get an education — could transform themselves into something unique in all the world. They could become Americans.

It wasn’t easy…those who had preceded them weren’t looking for more competition for the good jobs. One group didn’t welcome the next as next-door neighbors, didn’t want to share political power, truthfully didn’t see each other as equals.

But our Constitution said they were equal — under God, under the law, with the same rights. And America grew in numbers, in wealth, in the richness and diversity of our heritage.

A simple fact not recognized by the Progessives so actively pushing their distorted view of equality. It can only come at the expense of the freedom of the individual to prosper or to fail. Once that freedom is restored things will almost instantly become unequal again.

Alexander Hamilton wrote, “Inequality would exist as long as liberty existed…It would unavoidably result from that very liberty itself.”

Framers: Religion Essential to a Free People

Prepare yourselves: a bit of heresy is coming!

Just as the framers of the Constitution felt strongly that only a virtuous people were capable of governing themselves, so too they believed that religion was necessary to the maintenance of a free people.

Washington, in his Farewell Address, said: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

Ben Franklin writing to the president of Yale University said, “I believe in one God, the Creator of the universe. That he governs it by his providence. That he ought to be worshiped.”

And, he continued, “That the most acceptable service we render to him is in doing good to his other children.” In essence, the Golden Rule.

Following his tour of American in the 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville, writing in his seminal work, Democracy in America, noted that on his arrival in the United States “the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.”

“Religion in America,” he wrote, “takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions…they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions…”

We see it, of course, in more recent history. The civil rights movement centered around churches. Churches were a lot better advocate for voter registration than secular ACORN has been.

Yet, for all their piety, the framers understood that for all men to feel that they were created equal they had to be be free to worship in their own way. When the Constitution was drafted at least seven states had “official” state religions.

How, the framers questioned, could someone who practiced a different faith consider themselves equal under the eyes of the state and the law? This, of course, gave us the restriction on the Federal government establishing a favored religion or making any restriction on the practice of any religion.

Okay, here’s the heresy promised.

Religion too often divides people. Protestants see Catholics as them not us, Christians view Jews as them not us, Muslims see Hindus as them not us. Any student of history knows that as many people have been slaughtered in religious wars — in furtherance of the one true religion — as in politically-inspired ones.

Rather than religion being a core value, I’d prefer faith. Everyone should be free to express that faith as they see fit: Catholic, Protestant, Unitarian, Morman, Judaism, Hindu, Shinto, Islam — in a church, synagogue, mosque, temple or not — or the personal belief that they see God in a sunset or sitting by the side of a brook.

Faith that there is a purpose for man to be here on earth. Faith that our family, friends, neighbors, community or religious institution will be there when we need assistance. Faith that we will step forward when others need help. Faith that our government — at every level — will protect our person and our property. Faith that the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God are eternal and that they cannot be extinguished by men of evil.

Jefferson once applauded that all the sects found near his home in Charlottesville could share the courthouse as the common temple, one Sunday each. To him, separation of church and state did not mean the government had to be anti-religion, only that it needed to treat all fairly and equally. Had there been six or eight or ten denominations needing a place to practice their faith, I think he’d have found a way to accommodate them without showing favor to one.

So, friends, fellow citizens, join hands in the common faith that the system of government given to us by the framers of the Constitution, the freedoms and personal liberties that have attracted people from around the world, given us the highest standard of living ever seen even by kings, will once again flourish.

Faith fellow Americans. Have faith!

Words are Weapons: Use the Right Ammunition

Words are weapons.

The most powerful words have the ability to inspire, lift up, encourage and inform.

Equally, there are powerful words to dishearten, destroy hope and mislead.

Words are used to express incredible concepts like freedom and liberty, independence and community, compassion and love.

Today, with Twitter and Facebook and other internet social communities words are truly ubiquitous — everywhere you turn someone has an opinion and the means to broadcast it.

That’s good. I think.

We are each equally entitled to our opinions whether they are based on facts or rumors, conjecture or well-thought reason, logic or irrational fears.

What is bothersome is the clutter we must wade through to find the real nuggets — the 24 caret concept among the fool’s gold.

Presently we — conservatives and Constitutionalists — are engaged in a great civil war the result of which may well determine whether government “of the people, by the people, for the people” will endure or perish from the earth.

Our opponents — no, they are our enemies — the liberals, progressives, statists utilize words to demonize us, to marginalize us and to make us seem contemptible in the eyes of our fellow citizens.

We have every right to be angry at these tactics for, truth be told, they are a despicable way to promote public discourse. There is a natural inclination to fight fire with fire, give tit for tat, to engage in mutual assured destruction.

That bothers me. It seems unseemly to carry the banner of our Founding Fathers and the Constitution — quite probably the greatest, most reasoned, document in the history of mankind — into battle using invective and mindless name calling.

I believe we are better than that, better than them. I believe the truths of the Constitution are self-evident and the wisdom of the Founding Fathers is unimpeachable. I believe that when you are defending the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God a higher, more enlightened, certainly more civil, level of language is demanded.

When we are defending every individual’s inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, when we are fighting to defend the free enterprise system, when we seek to reign in an out-of-control government that is burdening us and our children and their children and their children with unimaginable debt, how does it serve us to do so from the gutter?

When you defend the Constitution, when you believe in American exceptionalism, when you honor the sacrifices of every person — in the military and in civilian life — who contributed to this country being the “shining city on the hill”, the beacon of freedom and hope for people throughout the world, I can only urge you to do so with dignity, with fullness of heart, with language befitting the cause.

There’s an old song, popular during World War II, that I remember listening to countless times on that big 78-rpm vinyl disk. Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition.

Virtue is Vital to a Free People

The Founding Fathers knew it! You know it! Living it is a bit more difficult.

A republic, a society of free people, cannot be born, thrive or endure without the governed and the governing being virtuous. Without a high moral code, without a respect for our fellow citizens, without a knowledge of the functioning — and functions — of the government freedom must wither and eventually die.

Back in 1775 and 1776 when the debate raged throughout the colonies about seeking independence from the British Empire, one question constantly came to the surface from the likes of Franklin, Washington and Paine. Were the Americans virtuous enough to govern themselves?

What is virtue?

First, there is private or personal virtue: the innate knowledge that one needs to lead a good life. In the words of Thomas Paine, to be “industrious, frugal and honest.” Virtuous people enjoy a spirit of equality and fairness.

While the Ten Commandments are considered the epitome of moral guidelines and most people are likely to equate virtue with being religious, such is really not the case.

The Founding Fathers were all Christians affiliated with eight different churches. While their were no Jews among them, much of the philosophy behind the Constitution was based on Old Testament teachings.

Still, religious belief is not a requirement for being a virtuous person. Anyone can hold virtue in high esteem, can practice the Golden Rule and allow his actions to demonstrate this fact.

Public virtue differs; there are times when a person must choose between their personal wants or sacrifice for the greater good of their society. Call it patriotism if you like.

Compassion and charity are strong virtues. Helping the poorest among us, paying taxes to educate our children, not allowing our elderly to suffer deprivations when they can no longer work are worthy causes for a free and just society.

It is not a virtue, however, to extract the property of one group to benefit another — that’s tyranny.

It is not a virtue to feel entitled to the fruits of another person’s labors while making little or no effort to provide the necessities of life for yourself.

As free people we make choices every day. We choose to work hard in school and get a good education — or not. We choose to take a job and work for the things we want in life — or not. We choose to treat our neighbors with respect and dignity — or not.

If we need — and receive — help from our fellow citizens, we must decide how to best utilize that assistance to change our circumstances, to become productive members of society and to be in a position to help the next needy person. That too is virtuous.

When we choose to watch hours of inane television while we remain clueless about our Constitution, when we give our children high-tech toys that teach slaughter and degrading behavior rather than spending good parental time with them, when they know the words to often vile, racist and sexist songs but not a single quote from a Founding Father about freedom and rights — those choices are not virtuous.

A virtuous citizenry will demand virtuous leaders. Selfish, self-centered, callous and uneducated citizens will have leaders that reflect these same qualities.

Look at our government today. Look at the Congress, your state government, your local government. Are you pleased with the quality of the representation you have? Are the schools teaching your children and grandchildren the lessons you believe are vital for a good education?

Quick now. Look in the mirror. Are you seeing the same qualities in yourself you see in your elected officials?

If we, the people, do not show the virtues of a free, fair and just society it is not likely that we will ever have leaders that demonstrate and live those virtues.

Yes, we can turn them out of office. The Constitution allows us to do that. But, who will we put in their place? If we are not virtuous how will we decide who among us is virtuous enough to represent us?

In the end, it’s not them that are destroying the greatest nation the world has ever seen. It’s not them that are degrading the best system of government ever devised. It’s not just them responsible for eroding personal liberties and burdening citizens and business with onerous taxes and endless  regulations.

The immortal words of Pogo, the cartoon swamp possum, sum it up best. “We have met the enemy…and he is us.”

The Constitution Gives You No Rights

Ask a friend, co-worker, neighbor — hell, ask yourself — what rights the Constitution gives them/you.

If you’re lucky — and have intelligent friends and neighbors — you’ll hear: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press…and on and on.

Wrong!

The Constitution — unquestionably the greatest political document in the history of mankind — does not give you a single right, a single liberty.

As Jefferson said so eloquently in the Declaration of Independence the rights you enjoy come from the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”.

Our Founding Fathers believed you were born with freedom, with certain inalienable rights and with the knowledge and wisdom to know right from wrong just as surely as you were born with the knowledge of how to breath.

The Constitution didn’t have to give you those rights. But, it did have to protect those rights from the intrusion of government. Read the Bill of Rights again…today…and you’ll see that everything is a prohibition on the government — not the citizen.

It says that Congress shall make no laws…that they can’t force you to quarter soldiers or to endure unreasonable search and seizure of your property or records.

The framers of the Constitution understood that given power, it was human nature to try to accrue more of it and to perpetuate that power. Thus, they put in restrictions — not on the citizen — on the government to protect your God-given rights.

If we seem to have less rights today,  it isn’t because the Constitution didn’t guarantee them; it is because men — for their own purposes and aggrandizement — usurped them and we allowed it to happen.

A look at history will show that all three branches of government colluded in the erosion of the checks and balances the Founders put into place.

The legislative branch, in the pursuit of power and votes, continually seeks out wealthy allies with whom they want to curry favor, as well as victim-groups for whom they will exchange largess for votes.

Presidents have sought greater sway over Congress and the executive branch has swollen beyond the conceivable recognition of the most forward-looking founder.

Worst of all, perhaps, is that the Judiciary has allowed it to happen when they were intended to be the guardians of the Constitution, the defenders of the limitations placed on the other branches and on the Federal government itself.

So, it falls to us. The citizenry. Still unchallenged is our right to vote the wrong-doers out of office; we retain the right to speak and write freely, strongly, boldly that we will not allow our rights to be trampled in the name of shameless power; we have the right to “seek a redress of grievances” against our government.

We intend to exercise those rights and to defend them with “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor”.

And, oh yes, if need be, with our right to bear arms.