A Declaration of Independence from The Socialists in the Federal Government

Props to TJ for the foundation of this “update” which is needed more now than ever.

-A Declaration of the Free People of America –

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

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal. Not that some men are more equal than others because of their skin color or minority status.
That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Not healthcare, living wages and “social justice”

That to secure these rights of life, liberty and happiness, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it. And we charge this government and those now in power as being destructive to our lives, our liberty and our happiness. In the course our Founders declared, we have such right to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as our Founding Fathers laid them down to effect in the best perfection achievable by man – our Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind is more disposed to suffer tyranny, while tyranny is sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they have become enslaved. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of Conservative Americans; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter and abolish the federal Systems of Socialism in Government.

The history of this present Administration, Congress and the Judiciary and to extents, the previous twelve Administrations, Congresses and Courts, is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States and the people in them. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world:

They have violated our Constitutionally-protected rights of free exercise of religion and worship by abolishing Christian exercise and presence in public via courts pushing a secular religion.

They have violated our Constitutionally-protected right of speech by passing laws that criminalize belief and opinion; by laws written to impact and restrict citizen support in elective campaigns of representatives; by requiring licenses, fees, tickets and other assorted sundry demands to peaceably assemble; by demonizing citizens petitioning for a redress of grievances and shutting constituents from meetings to discuss pending legislation by stacking the halls with bussed-in supporters; by creating a climate of hatred, fear and loathing for those opposed to this government’s actions.

They seek to violate our Constitutionally-protected right of press and political speech by use of clever locality, diversity and content applications designed to restrict opinions and punish mass communication providers that do not comply with government-mandated rules designed to suppress dissent.

They have violated our Constitutionally-protected right to bear arms in outright infringement and by nefarious tax schemes intended to bar the right of the citizen to arms and possessions of arms to carry on his person or own in his own home.

They have bankrupted the entire nation in unfathomable and unrecoverable debt in behemoth government social programs robbing the treasury of the People by welfare ponzi schemes that have created mass entitlements designed to keep the people dependent on government assistance.

They have bankrupted the social security and medical aid programs that take by fiat, a portion of every income to support continued abuse and misappropriations by government bureaucrats.

They have bankrupted private industry by mandating regulations designed for cronyism and dependence of constituents to politicians for reelection.

They pass into law, thousands of pages of legislation, written by unknown persons and lobbyists without reading the bills or knowing what they contain.

They pass into law by inserting hidden ‘riders’ and ‘pork’, programs, taxes, regulations and tyranny into bills having nothing to do with the purpose of the proposed legislation.

They hamstring industry vital to national infrastructure by myriad regulations beholden to environmentalists that lobby Congress with money and advisement that ensure our national dependence on foreign energy supplies.

They have robbed wholesale the taxpaying public by nationalizing the private business and industry of mortgage banking and auto manufacturers, misappropriating billions of funds to bail out unspecified recipients and impoverishing the people and future generations of Americans in the process.

They are in the process of unconstitutionally mandating all citizens purchase government health insurance or face penalty.

They have designed bureaucratic panels to rule on matters of life and death in health care that they devise to take over.

They pass laws on the citizenry that they exempt themselves from.

They have continually violated the law of the land and diminished the rights of American citizens by allowing foreign illegal immigrants entry and rein into the country without
consequence at the expense of the citizenry for the purpose of expanding a political party with dependents.

They have provided aid and comfort to an Islamic enemy at war with the people of the nation, and afforded non-citizen enemy combatants with rights that are the sole province of American citizens.

The Courts have routinely legislated from the bench without any authority in cases brought before them.

The Courts have stated their decisions to rule according to foreign laws, personal life experiences and biases and not by the rule of the Constitution of the United States.

The Courts have overturned the express will of the people who have petitioned and passed legislation to alleviate their burdens by personal political biases that are ruled unconstitutional based on wrongful precedents.

The Executive has unlawfully nationalized private business with taxpayer money, without our consent.

The Executive has engaged in treason by denouncing his country and his countrymen on foreign soil.

The Executive has pursued a goal of redistributing wealth and private property by demonizing private citizens and enacting policies designed to in his words “return the nation’s wealth to their rightful owners”.

The Executive is engaged in creating a standing civilian political army answerable only to him, that is “just as strong, just as large and just as well funded as the military”.

The Executive is engaged in a preemptive and constant program of demagoguery and derision of political opponents to the point of using federal agencies to declare opponents “domestic terrorists” and to turn the citizenry against specific individuals and professions in order to enact takeovers of those properties.

The Executive has established a government snitch program by requiring citizens report opponents of the President’s policies to a White House website that collected the information of ‘protestors’ for further use in violation of the Constitution and law.

The Executive has unlawfully and unconstitutionally breached the Separation of Powers and duties specifically assigned to Congress by running the 2010 Census out of the Oval Office with a host of invasive questions for the purpose of redistricting the nation to ensure permanent political office for their party.

The Executive has engaged in routine deception of his policies, plans and statements, even concealing his eligibility for the High Office that he holds by refusing to reveal and release information that would qualify his tenure.

The Executive has erected a multitude of New Czars, unaccountable, unreviewable and untenable to oversight or the recall of the people who will make law and policy outside of legislation to send swarms of Officers to harass our people, eat out of their substance and impoversh classes of Americans.

The Executive has combined with others to subject us to an ideology and jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts without Legislation.

For protecting Jihad terrorists and Black Panther poll intimidators, by immunity from investigation or punishment for any lawbreaking which they should commit on the citizens of these States:

For penalizing our industries in deference to third world nations: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us of our liberties:

For abolishing the Free Market System, establishing therein a Marxist government, and enlarging its power so as to render it at once as an absolute oligarchy of power in this country.

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the foundation and principles of the nation:

He has declared us “an unjust nation” and is waging War against us. He has plundered our wealth, ravaged our liberty, impoverished our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time recruiting large armies of political Mercenaries to complete the works of redistribution, enslavement, death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Oppression and Enslavement paralleled in brutal Marxist regimes, and totally unworthy to hold the office of a civilized nation.

He has encouraged our fellow Citizens taken captive by decades of indoctrination, to bear false witness and eventually Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our nation, merciless Socialism and despotism whose history is one of destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

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

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our government-supporting brethren. We have warned them of attempts by their government to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us all. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our liberty and the facts in our Constitution here. We have appealed to our commonality of citizenry and love of liberty to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably enslave us all.

They too seem deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the free individuals and Conservative people of the united States of America, in General Agreement, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of God Almighty and our fellow citizens, solemnly publish and declare, That we sovereign citizens of America are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent from the authoritarian arm of the federal government, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the federal government, and that all political connection between them and the federal government in Washington D.C., is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent Sovereign Citizens, have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things that our Founder’s intended within the boundaries of the Constitution of the United States of America which was our bulwark against an oppressive and intrusive government.

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.

18″ x 24″ Downloadable Decorative PDF File

“We Have This Day Restored The Sovereign”

We Have Restored The Soveriegn

By Rev. Peter Marshall

From the new edition of The Light and The Glory – 2008 

 

 

In Philadelphia an almost fantasy-like refusal to accept the reality of what had already taken place seems to have held the colonial representatives firmly in its thrall. So strong was it that they spent much time carefully drafting a conciliatory appeal addressed directly to King George who, when it was presented to him, disdained to even look at it.

The situation was reminiscent of the Israelites in the wilderness, convincing one another that they had been better off in Egypt, and growing daily more certain that the only thing to do was to go back. For out in the wilderness they were forced to face the unknown and to put their entire trust in God. There was no one else to trust! Forgotten was all memory of the slave pits and the grinding, hopeless existence they knew, before the Lord God of Hosts delivered them. All they could remember now was that their bellies had been full, and they had known where their next meal was coming from, even if it was only stale crusts.

It may well have been the unknown – of having to trust in God, because there was nowhere else to turn – that was causing many delegates to Congress in 1776 to turn their thoughts back to a less perilous time of  the 1740’s, or fifties, or sixties.

There were, however, a few realists in Congress who were not trying to escape into fantasy – men like John and Samuel Adams, and Patrick Henry and the others from Virginia. At least, John Adams, often the most persevering of the realists, had the benefit of having a wife with an extraordinary awareness of exactly what was at stake. As Abigail wrote to him on June 18:

“I feel no anxiety at the large armament designed against us. The remarkable interpositions of heaven in our favor cannot be too gratefully acknowledged. He who fed the Israelites in the wilderness, who clothes the lilies of the field and who feeds the young ravens when they cry, will not forsake a people engaged in so righteous a cause, if we remember His loving kindness.”

Adams and the other realists saw clearly that events had progressed beyond the point of no return, and that to go back now would be to go back under England’s terms – under a far-from-benevolent dictatorship. For despite the support of eloquent and high-minded Members of Parliament, the prevailing sentiment there reflected the King’s own intransigence (as well it might, since George III’s personal patronage had bought the majority of the seats). In the Kings eyes, the only way to deal with rebellion was to crush it. To show even the slightest mercy was to invite a recurrence in the future.

Nevertheless, great Parliamentarians like Pitt, Burke, and Fox, in speaking out for the cause of America, reached heights of oratory seldom heard since the days of Rome.

Of those in sympathy with the American cause, the most impressive address came not from the House of Lords, but from the House of Commons. There, Mr. George Johnstone spoke in terms so ringing that he might have been standing alongside Samuel Adams or Patrick Henry.

     “To a mind who loves to contemplate the glorious spirit of freedom, no spectacle can be more affecting than the action on Bunker Hill. To see an irregular peasantry commanded by a physician (he was referring to Patriot leader Dr. Joseph Warren, killed as one of the last defenders), inferior in number, opposed by every circumstance of cannon and bombs that could terrify timid minds, calmly waiting the attack of the gallant Howe leading on the best troops in the world, with an excellent train of artillery, and twice repulsing those very troops who had often chased the chosen battalions of France, and at last retiring for want of ammunition, but in so respectable a manner that they were not even pursued—who can reflect on such scenes and not adore the constitution of government which could breed such men! Who is there that can dismiss all doubts on the justice of the cause which can inspire such conscious rectitude?

     The conduct of the people of New England for wisdom, courage, temperance, fortitude and all those qualities that can command the admiration of noble minds, is not surpassed in the history of any nation under the sun. Instead of wreaking our vengeance against that colony, their heroism alone should plead their forgiveness.^”

Neither the King, nor any of his Ministers, nor any of his bought Members of Parliament, had ears to hear.  That same day, George III publicly announced his decision to crush the rebellion by force of arms, including the use of mercenaries. When the ensuing debate was finally over, the House of Lords voted in favor of the King’s address, 76 to 33, and Commons voted 278 to 108 in favor. England declared war.

Even so, seven months later, as the first week of June, 1776, drew to a close, the majority of men in Congress in Philadelphia were hoping against hope that some eleventh-hour formula for reconciliation might be found. They were aware of what it would mean, and how much it might personally cost them, if they were to cast their votes with those few who were now calling for an open declaration of independence. Such a move would close the door forever to any possibility of rapprochement with the Crown. Down on their necks would come the full military might on land and sea of the greatest power on earth. Even if they were truly united, they could not hope to stand up to such a force for long.

All their debates over the past weeks had indicated how utterly separated and individualistic these Thirteen Colonies actually still were. It would take a miracle of God to bring them into unity. . . .  Dare they commit the Colonies they represented to such peril?

Though none of the delegates openly spoke of their personal jeopardy, it was surely on the mind of more than a few.  The men who signed such a declaration would, in the quite probable event of America’s defeat, be held personally responsible. And throughout the British Empire, the penalty for instigating rebellion against the Crown was death. As Ben Franklin put it wryly, “Gentlemen, we must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly we will all be hanged separately.”

The yearning to be free and stay free was gaining momentum. On May 10, town meetings all over Massachusetts had unanimously voted in favor of independence. On May 15, the Virginia Convention voted for independence. And on June 7, documented evidence arrived of the treaties which George III had made with the German princes, purchasing the use of their mercenaries in America. In the face of that, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia formally proposed that Congress make a declaration of independence, stating that these united Colonies are, and of a right ought to be, free and independent states. John Adams immediately seconded the proposal. After a day’s debate, Congress adjourned for three weeks to let the doubtful representatives of the middle Colonies go home to sound out the will of their constituents.

In the meantime, Franklin, Adams, Sherman of Connecticut, Livingston of New York, and young Jefferson of Virginia hurried to draw up a draft of the proposed declaration.

“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal. . . . We, therefore, the representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent States. . . . 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.”

Jefferson did most of the final composing, borrowing heavily from the popular phraseology of the day – except for the two phrases, “appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions” and “with a Firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence.” Congress insisted upon including these phrases, over Jefferson’s vehement objection, for he was a confirmed “enlightened rationalist,” soon to become privately a Unitarian.

So resentful was Jefferson at their tampering with his prose, that he sent copies of his original draft to his personal friends, that they might better appreciate his unedited effort.

June 28: The convention of Maryland voted for independence. Word reached Philadelphia that New Jersey had dismissed her old delegates and was sending new ones, who were instructed to vote for independence.

July 1: Congress entered what John Adams called “the greatest debate of all.” Dickinson of Pennsylvania spoke eloquently and at length against independence. When he had finished, there was a long and thoughtful silence. Adams kept hoping that someone “less obnoxious” than himself, who was “believed to be the author of all the mischief,” would rise to answer. But none did, and so, with great reluctance, Adams rose. And he spoke with such quiet power and conviction that not a man present remained unmoved, especially as he reached his conclusion:

“Before God, I believe the hour has come. My judgment approves this measure, and my whole heart is in it. All that I have, and all that I am, and all that I hope in this life, I am now ready here to stake upon it. And I leave off as I began, that live or die, survive or perish, I am for the Declaration. It is my living sentiment, and by the blessing of God it shall be my dying sentiment, Independence now, and Independence for ever!^”

No one spoke. Just then, the door swung open and in strode a mud-spattered figure with two others behind him. It was Dr. John Witherspoon, at the head of the New Jersey delegation. Apologizing for being late, he said that although he had not heard the debate, he had not lacked sources of information on the various issues. “Gentlemen, New Jersey is ready to vote for independence. In our judgment, the country is not only ripe for independence, but we are in danger of becoming rotten for the want of it, if we delay any longer.”

The Congress proceeded to the vote, and nine of the thirteen Colonies voted with New Jersey that day: Pennsylvania and South Carolina votedno, and New York abstained. Delaware was split, one delegate to one.

Since Congress was, in effect, only acting as a committee on behalf of the whole country, they had agreed that any decision on the Declaration would have to be unanimous. It was decided that debate would resume the next morning, to be followed by another vote. In the meantime, to resolve the Delaware deadlock, which could well decide the outcome, an express rider was dispatched to Dover, which would become the capital of Delaware, to fetch their third delegate, Caesar Rodney.

A Patriot of deep conviction, Rodney had been summoned home on urgent business. But now the express rider arrived at his farm at two in the morning, bearing word that debate would resume in less than seven hours, after which the final vote would be taken. Quickly getting dressed and saddling his best horse, Rodney galloped off into the pitch-black, stormy night. It was eighty-nine miles to Philadelphia, over stretches of road which were difficult under the best of conditions, and this night the conditions could hardly have been worse. Streams which were normally fordable with ease had become swollen torrents, and the rain had turned one portion of the road into a quagmire so deep that Rodney had to dismount and lead his horse through it, to avoid its being crippled.

Unable to obtain a fresh change of horses until dawn, Rodney nevertheless arrived at the State House by 1:00 p.m. just as the final vote was being taken. Half-carried into the assembly room, he was barely able to speak: “As I believe the voice of my constituents and of all sensible and honest men is in favor of independence, my own judgment concurs with them. I vote for independence.”

 

Few knew the circumstances surrounding Rodney’s vote. Caesar Rodney had cancer of the face, so advanced that he had taken to wearing a scarf around his neck to hide the disfigurement of his jaw. He had been planning a trip to England, because he had heard of a doctor in London, who might be able to help him. But he, and every man in that room, was well aware that if they declared independence Britain would immediately declare war on America and invade the Colonies. Caesar Rodney knew that he might never see England before he died of cancer. Nonetheless, without a moment’s hesitation, he voted “aye” for independence.

The last line of the document he had just voted to approve says: “With a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we pledge to one another our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

With his vote Rodney had literally pledged his life – and gave us the Declaration. Had he voted “Nay,” Delaware’s vote would have been “Nay,” for the other two delegates had once again split their vote. Lacking a unanimous vote, the issue would have been tabled.

As it was, the vote was unanimous – twelve to none, with New York abstaining. The Thirteen Colonies had just become the United States of America.

In the silence that followed the announcement of the vote, the afternoon sun cast its soft rays through the tall windows – on a brass candlestick standing on a green felt table-covering, a carved eagle over the door, a pair of steel-rimmed spectacles lying on a polished desk.

The magnitude of what they had done began to weigh upon them, and they realized that they and their countrymen were no longer Englishmen, but citizens of a fledging nation barely a few minutes old. Many stared out the window. Some had tears in their eyes. A few, like Witherspoon, bowed their heads and closed their eyes in prayer.

Two days later, as President of the Continental Congress, John Hancock would legalize the Declaration by placing his famous signature on it. Now, he broke the silence: “Gentlemen, the price on my head has just been doubled!”

A month after the vote was taken, delegates who wished to sign the Declaration of Independence began gathering in Philadelphia on August 1. That evening, Samuel Adams spoke to those who had arrived, and put into sharp spiritual focus what they had accomplished: “We have this day restored the Sovereign, to Whom alone men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven and. . . from the rising to the setting sun, may his Kingdom come.”

Observing Independence

 

A Necessary Observance

Mark Alexander

If our nation’s Founders could visit us on this, our 232nd Independence Day, what would they make of us? What would they declare of us?

A hint can be discerned in a letter from John Adams to his wife, Abigail, on July 3, 1776, as the Declaration of Independence had just been approved. “It ought to be commemorated,” said the man who would become our second president, “as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more. You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Day’s Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not.”

Americans have maintained the “Pomp and Parade” for more than two centuries now, and the “Bonfires and Illuminations” are commonplace, but how often do we recognize Independence Day as “the Day of Deliverance?” How often do we honor it with “solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty”? How often do we contemplate the cost of our freedom, “the Toil and Blood and Treasure?”

Our Founders believed that independence was more than a choice; they viewed our break from royal rule as necessary.

Consider the first statement of the Declaration: “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 signatories were emphatic that separation from the crown was not only an objective, but an obligation: “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.” In conclusion, the Founders wrote, “We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation…”

Their cause, of course, was not anti-government. Rather they objected to the misgovernment of the king, saying, “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” Furthermore, the Americans had been patient, petitioning their British rulers for redress for over a decade. Armed hostilities had commenced on April 19, 1775, at the battles of Lexington and Concord, and the colonists faced the full power of the British Empire in their quest for American independence.

One year before taking that step for nationhood, on July 5, 1775, the Continental Congress adopted the Olive Branch Petition, beseeching the British king for a peaceful resolution of the American colonies’ grievances. A day later, that same Congress resolved the “Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking Up Arms.”

King George III refused to read the peace petition and assembled his armies. On July 2, 1776, Richard Henry Lee’s proposal for a formal declaration of separation passed, and the document was ordered printed on July 4.

The war-weary among us today might ask, was independence really necessary?

To pose the question at the outset of the Revolutionary War was to answer it. Representatives of the colonial Americans realized that, in voicing this query, they already possessed proof that they, not the King of England, were legitimate instruments of self-government for their countrymen. How could circumstances be otherwise when the king offered no remedy for his subjects’ complaints, no guarantee their rights would be respected, and no means for them to govern themselves in their new lands?

The founders knew, however, that power could not be its own justification. They recognized that only an appeal to overarching laws, binding the king as much as his subjects, was legitimate. And abuse of authority demonstrated disqualification of any governor, whether a monarch or a purported representative.

We would do well to apply this insight to the political debates of today.

Indeed, two competing philosophies of government at odds during the American Revolution have reappeared, with the anti-republican form seen in those politicians who would seek to gain favor by manipulating language and misrepresenting their positions. Royalists, on the other hand, believed that the king was divinely ordained to rule over the people and was therefore above the law. This view is manifest currently in government officials—especially our elected officers—who believe they may properly command the citizenry to whatever they please, to whichever they purport to be for the good of the people.

As Thomas Jefferson observed, “Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread.” Yet the prevailing philosophy of government proposes exactly this—that directions from Washington as to how we must conduct ourselves, in matters large and small, will lead inexorably to scarcity and will inevitably erode our freedom.

Our system of government today is not so different from the monarchy we escaped, except that a swarm of bureaucrats have taken up the throne.

A necessity thus presents itself to us as well: We must reconnect with the timeless principles that inspired our Founding Fathers; those same principles that long ago gave birth to a good, great and God-blessed nation.

“[W]hat do we mean by the American Revolution?” reflected John Adams. “Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations… This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.”

Let us celebrate this Independence Day 2008 in a manner that Adams himself might recognize—with “solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty,” and with a rededication to the principles of our necessary American Revolution. And as always, in the words of George Washington, “Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.”

 

Vindicators of the Declaration

Our nation was born on the shoulders of an army, whose exertions and principled patriotism gave the famous parchment its life.

Ron Paul, Off The Mark and His Rocker

Election 2008 is no doubt a contest between overt Big Government Socialists and Marxists in the Democrat Party and several Big Government Liberals dressed up in Conservative clothing in the Republican Party.

There are a couple of stand-outs that have records of consistent Conservatism, but they are largely marginalized by the Big Government Elite Blue Bloods in the party and by the media that wants either a liberal or an anti-Bush candidate on the GOP ticket to run opposite of the crown they wish to bestow upon Hillary.

And then there is Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is the lone stand-out in the GOP. His mob followers argue that this is because he is the only true Conservative in the race, the rest of us would argue it is because he is clearly not a Conservative or Republican at all – but a typical Libertarian with more in common with the Anti-war Leftists than with Reagan Conservatives.

Of course the argument is that Ron Paul is closer to Reagan and the Constitution than any other candidate. I certainly do not agree with that assessment, notably because in the case of comparison between Paul and Reagan – Reagan NEVER, and I mean NEVER insinuated once that America was the cause of the problems in the world that Ron Paul has consistently charged us with.

Also, even though Ron Paul’s domestic ideas of returning to the Constitution are admiarable, he not only is off the mark on foreign policy, he is off his rocker if he thinks he can enact or enable any of his agenda as President outside of emasculating the military and retreating America from the world.

Bruce Walker posted an excellent observation in the American Thinker of where Ron Paul misses the mark in terms of addressing his “non-interventionist” (read Isolationist Pacifism) ideals.

Ron Paul holds the vain hope that American government would return to constitutional law anytime soon, even if he did win the presidency. Congress, the judiciary, legal education, and tradition have imparted momentum to the living constitution school of thought. Bring about an actual return to the Constitution requires more than a snap of the president’s fingers. Federal courts routinely “interpret” the Constitution in ways directly in conflict with the plain language of the document. At best, a president can only appoint judges the Senate will confirm and wait for natural turnover.

A lot of persuasion is necessary before Americans (including our elites and their institutions) change their way thinking. We in fact still need a crusade to change hearts and minds more than a candidacy.

This has been my main point of contention with the Ron Paul Mob Zombies from the get-go. The amount of virtual messiah-worship that Ron Paul is going to achieve all of these amazing things and save the country from itself is not only delusional, it’s dangerous. It has spawned a rabid fanatacism that one can easily compare with the Brownshirts of Germany in the 1930’s. No man is going to be able to do the things many of Ron Paul’s supporters are absolutely sure he can accomplish – mainly due to the limits the Constitution places on the Executive itself.

For all the love of the Constitution that Ron Paul stokes the masses to believe in, the big love is reserved for what they perceive to be the Constitution’s pacifism and ‘non-interventionism’. This is the one and only brick holding the various and bizarre ideologies of the Ron Paul brigades together.

But they miss the mark. Bruce Walker points this out:

And if we are going to return to first principles, remember that the Constitution is not the foundational document of our American experiment in individual liberty. It was preceded by the Articles of Confederation. Prior to the Articles of Confederation, which were adopted after independence, the Continental Congress acted as the original government of the United States and successfully waged a war against the great superpower on the planet with very little real authority. The fundamental principles of American government were established long the Constitution was adopted.

What does matter is the Declaration of Independence. The divine endowment of all people with liberty comes directly out of this document of 1776 and it is to this document that serious friends of liberty should look for inspiration and restoration. And what was the Declaration of Independence? It was, in effect, a declaration of war against the British Empire.

It was not an isolationist document but a universalist document. It speaks, pointedly, to the rest of the world. It talks about the reasons that governments are formed (not just our government.) It was bold, sweeping, and international. And it was seen by the rest of the world as just that: A revolutionary document for all peoples, even if it applied specifically only to thirteen embattled colonies in North American.

Ron Paul wants to return us to the Constitution, as if it were a sacred document which granted us freedom. Our spiritual lodestar should be the Declaration of Independence, which remains a much more dangerous, much more powerful, and much more relevant document to our times.

Those are indeed sobering points to meditate upon. The argument that ensues is that the Declaration of Independence is NOT LAW, which by doing so undercuts and grants the Socialists and Secularists the platforms upon which they stand to regulate and adminster liberty as they see fit.
The more worrisome attributes of applying strict Constitutional ideals to foreign policy without the grounding anchor of the Declaration and other fundamentals of liberty in a modern age – is the kind of backwards idealism that ignores reality for a theory that history has already shown to be impractical and endangering.

Paul also seems to doubt that people wish to do America harm because it is America, and that nuclear weapons change everything. Ever since H.G. Wells first used the term “atomic bomb” in his science fiction stories more than a century ago, it has become almost inevitable that true, horrific global war power was inevitable. Happily, America acquired fission weapons and then fusion weapons first. Happily also, America has had leaders willing to use that power to protect our nation and allies who would otherwise be unprotected.

And, as we learned from the Japanese in the Second World War and from radical Moslems today, the calculus of economic benefits and political rights which works very well in moderating and balancing the behavior of most people, simply does not work with everyone. Does anyone doubt that the Japanese would have used the atomic bomb on American cities or that radical Moslems will use thermonuclear bombs on America, if they can, even if it means massive casualties in our retaliation?

Liberty can no longer stand safely behind two vast oceans and decent men can no longer ignore their human brethren after Hitler, Stalin and Mao.

I think this mindset of Ron Paul is the most damning proof that he is unfit for the role of Commander In Chief. He has asserted that Iran poses no threat to anyone, not even to Israel. Ron Paul says that Iran has no navy, army or air force, which is complete ignorance on his part. He is of the clueless ideal that because Israel may have 300 nuclear weapons (which has never been confirmed or admitted to). Nobody would touch them. History has already proven him wrong since America has nuclear weapons, has USED nuclear weapons, and still we have been attacked by Jihadists. Ron paul also magically thinks that all the rhetoric coming from the Jihadists about annihilating Israel and America is just laughable – and that there is no possibility of harm from such entities.

I suppose if a person holds to the same ideas that many of the 9-11 Truthers that support Ron Paul hold; thinking we perpetrated 9-11 on ourselves – it is no wonder Ron Paul then so easily discounts what ragheads in the deserts of Afghansitan were able to carry out in killing 3,000 Americans in short order on September 11, 2001. Perhaps this is the reason he thinks only one submarine with ballistic nuclear weapons is all the military defense America really needs.

Bruce Walker concludes:

Liberty can no longer stand safely behind two vast oceans and decent men can no longer ignore their human brethren after Hitler, Stalin and Mao. ….Congressman Paul might recall the Gipper’s Cold War strategy: “How about this: We win; they lose?”

Ronald Reagan, like Abraham Lincoln, understood the supra-constitutional importance of liberty in the fulfillment of America, and liberty to them meant more than just the liberty of American citizens. ….

But the vision of America is much more than the Constitution. It is much more than Congressman Paul sees. What Ron Paul proposes is not bad or dishonest. It is simply no longer enough for liberty and decency to survive in America or in the world.

America does not exist in a vacuum. The world loathes the kind of liberty America represents, because it does not grant it to nobles, dictators and politburos. America is an anomoly in the world’s written history of the beastly empires of men. It seeks to return itself to that kind of rule that 500 years of Christian-led and inspired government has broken. Ron Paul considers fellow countrymen and our government the only single threat to liberty and assigns our involvement in the world as the cause of the enemies we have that are calling for and planning for our destruction.

That giant aspect of Ron Paul’s appeal is not only off the mark, but not even in the right direction of the target.