Archive for July 3rd, 2009

First, a little bit of history

July 3, 2009

Independence Day 2009: We still hold these truths…

“Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” –Patrick Henry

As we celebrate the 233rd year of our Declaration of Independence, let us look at the common parlance associated with the polar spectrum of current political ideology (while such a review is still permitted by the state), and explore what is meant by “Left versus Right,” “Liberal versus Conservative” and “Tyranny versus Liberty”?

Tyranny v. Liberty (poster available at PatriotShop.US)

First, a little history.

On July 4th of 1776, our Founders, assembled as representatives to the Second Continental Congress, issued a declaration stating most notably: “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 whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

In other words, our Founders affirmed that our rights, which are inherent by Natural Law as provided by our Creator, can’t be arbitrarily alienated by men like England’s King George III, who believed that the rights of men are the gifts of government.

Our Founders publicly declared their intentions to defend these rights by attaching their signatures between July 4th and August 2nd of 1776 to the Declaration. They and their fellow Patriots pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor as they set about to defend the Natural Rights of man.

At the conclusion of the American War for Independence in 1783, our Founders determined the new nation needed a more suitable alliance among the states than the Articles of Confederation. After much deliberation, they proposed the U.S. Constitution, adopted in 1787, ratified in 1788 and implemented in 1789 as subordinate guidance to our Declaration of Independence.

Since that time, generations of American Patriots have laid down their lives “to support and defend” our Constitution — and I would note here that their sacred oath says nothing about a so-called “Living Constitution” as advocated by the political left.

Given that bit of history as a backdrop, consider the lexicography of our current political ideology.

On the dark side of the spectrum would be Leftists, liberals and tyrants.

(Sidebar: One should not confuse “classical liberalism” with “contemporary liberalism.” The former refers to those, like Thomas Jefferson, who advocated individual liberty, while the latter refers to those, like Barack Hussein Obama, who advocate statism, which is the antithesis of liberty.)

Statism, as promoted by contemporary American liberals, has as its objective the establishment of a central government authorized as the arbiter of all that is “good” for “the people” — and conferring upon the State ultimate control over the most significant social manifestation of individual rights, economic enterprise.

On the left, all associations between individuals ultimately augment the power and control of the State. The final expression and inevitable terminus of such power and control, if allowed to progress unabated, is tyranny.

The word “tyranny” is derived from the Latin “tyrannus,” which translates to “illegitimate ruler.”

Liberals, then, endeavor to undermine our nation’s founding principles in order to achieve their statist objectives. However, politicians who have taken an oath to “support and defend” our Constitution, but then govern in clear defiance of that oath, are nothing more than illegitimate rulers, tyrants.

(Sidebar: Some Leftists contend that Communism and Fascism are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Properly understood, however, both of these forms of government are on the left, because both have as a common end the establishment of an omnipotent state led by a dictator.)

Over on the “right wing” of the political spectrum, where the light of truth shines, would be “conservatives,” from the Latin verb “conservare,” meaning to preserve, protect and defend — in this case, our Constitution.

American conservatives are those who seek to conserve our nation’s First Principles, those who advocate for individual liberty, constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, strong national defense and traditional American values.

Contemporary political ideology is thus defined by tyrannus and conservare occupying the Left and Right ends of the American political spectrum, defining the difference between liberals and conservatives.

Though there are many devoted protagonists at both ends of this scale, the space in between is littered with those who, though they identify with one side or the other, are not able to articulate the foundation of that identity. That is to say, they are not rooted in liberal or conservative doctrine, but motivated by contemporaneous political causes associated with the Left or Right. These individuals do not describe themselves as “liberal” or “conservative” but as Democrat or Republican. Further, they tend to elect ideologically ambivalent politicians who are most adept at cultivating special interest constituencies.

That having been said, however, there is a major difference between those on the Left and the Right, as demonstrated by our most recent national elections. Those on the Left tend to form a more unified front for the purpose of electability; they tend to embrace a “win at all costs” philosophy, while those on the right tend to spend valuable political capital drawing distinctions between and among themselves.

I would suggest that this disparity is the result of the contest between human nature and Natural Law.

The Left appeals to the most fundamental human instincts to procure comfort, sustenance and shelter, and to obtain those basic needs by the most expedient means possible. The Left promises that the State will attain those needs equally, creating a path of least resistance for that fulfillment.

On the other end of the spectrum, the Right promotes the tenets of Natural Law — individual liberty and its attendant requirements of personal responsibility and self-reliance.

Clearly, one of these approaches is far easier to sell to those who have been systematically dumbed down by government educational institutions and stripped of their individual dignity by the plethora of government welfare programs.

That easy sell notwithstanding, the threat of tyranny can eventually produce an awakening among the people and a reversal of trends toward statism. But this reversal depends on the emergence of a charismatic, moral leader who can effectively advocate for liberty. (Ronald Wilson Reagan comes to mind.)

For some nations, this awakening has come too late. The most notable examples in the last century are Russia, Germany, Italy and China, whose peoples suffered greatly under the statist tyrannies they came to embrace. In Germany and Italy, the state collapsed after its expansionist designs were forcibly contained. In Russia, the state collapsed under the weight of 70 years of economic centralization and ideological expansionism.

The Red Chinese regime, having witnessed the collapse of the USSR, has so far avoided its own demise by combining an autocratic government with components of a free enterprise economic system. (My contacts in China, including that nation’s largest real estate developers and investment fund managers, believe the Red regime will be gone within five years.)

Of course, there exists an American option for the rejection of tyranny: Revolution. And it is an essential option, because the Natural Rights of man are always at risk of contravention by tyrants. At no time in the last century has our Republic faced a greater threat from “enemies, domestic” than right now.

“Our individual salvation,” insists Barack Obama, “depends on collective salvation.” In other words, BHO’s tyranny, et al, must transcend Constitutional authority. And in accordance with his despotic ideals, Obama is now implementing “the fundamental transformation of the United States of America” that he promised his cadre of liberal voters.

It is yet to be seen whether the current trend toward statism will be reversed by the emergence of a great conservative leader, or by revolution, but if you’re betting on another Ronald Reagan, I suggest you hedge your bet.

Our Declaration’s author, Thomas Jefferson, understood the odds. He wrote, “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground,” and he concluded, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Accordingly, George Washington advised, “We should never despair, our Situation before has been unpromising and has changed for the better, so I trust, it will again. If new difficulties arise, we must only put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times.”

Indeed we must.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

Lautenberg’s Axis of Evil at it again

July 3, 2009

Gun Hater Lautenberg Proposes “Extraordinary Powers” Be Given To the U.S. Attorney General To Limit Gun Sales.

Obama and the White House are looking the other way as Lautenberg seeks to ban guns from 1,000,000 US citizens on a secret FBI terrorist watch list. Obama has deliberately and repeatedly lied to America’s 90 million gun owners across the country when he insisted that he would not try to take away anyone’s firearms. Now Obama’s silence endorses Lautenberg’s latest attempt at banning guns.

Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists. We must defeat this bill from giving extraordinary powers to limit gun sales to the Attorney General.

Lautenberg To Reveal Names on Secret List

The names of the people on the watch list are secret, and Lautenberg said he was frustrated by the F.B.I.’s refusal to disclose to investigators details and specific cases of gun purchases beyond the aggregate data.

Gun hater Lautenberg requested the gun grab study from the Government Accountability Office. He is using statistics, compiled in the report that is scheduled for public release next week to invade US citizen’s privacy and put more restrictions on the Second Amendment.

Lautenberg said he wanted a better understanding of who is being allowed to buy guns.

How you ask? Trial by innuendo and misinformation that has put 1,000,000 Americans and maybe even you on a terrorist watch list without your knowledge by saying: people placed on this government’s terrorist watch list can be stopped from getting on a plane or getting a visa, and will also be stopped from buying a gun.

Lautenberg wants gun purchases stopped for just being on the list. Current law states federal officials must find some other disqualification of a would-be gun buyer, like being a felon, an illegal alien or a drug addict.

Is your name on the list and can you get it removed?

The government’s consolidated watch list, used to identify people suspected of links to terrorists, has grown to more than one million names since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It also has drawn widespread criticism over the prevalence of mistaken identities and unclear links to terrorism.

A CNN story raises questions about mistaken identities on the list – James Robinson is a retired Air National Guard brigadier general and a commercial pilot for a major airline who flies passenger planes around the country.

James Robinson is a retired brigadier general and a commercial pilot. His name is on the terrorist “watch list.”

He has even been certified by the Transportation Security Administration to carry a weapon into the cockpit as part of the government’s defense program should a terrorist try to commandeer a plane.

But there’s one problem: James Robinson, the pilot, has difficulty even getting to his plane because his name is on the government’s terrorist “watch list.”

That means he can’t use an airport kiosk to check in; he can’t do it online; he can’t do it curbside. Instead, like thousands of Americans whose names match a name or alias used by a suspected terrorist on the list, he must go to the ticket counter and have an agent verify that he is James Robinson, the pilot, and not James Robinson, the terrorist.

“Shocking’s a good word; frustrating,” Robinson — the pilot — said. “I’m carrying a weapon, flying a multimillion-dollar jet with passengers, but I’m still screened as, you know, on the terrorist watch list.”

History Repeating Itself?

The 1938 German Weapons Act, the precursor of the current weapons law, superseded the 1928 law. As under the 1928 law, citizens were required to have a permit to carry a firearm and a separate permit to acquire a firearm. Furthermore, the law restricted ownership of firearms to “…persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit.”

Lautenberg Must be Stopped

Recently Sens. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Jack Reed (D-RI) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) have joined Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and victims and family members of the Virginia Tech tragedy, to introduce legislation to eliminate the private transfers of firearms and close the nation’s “gun show loophole.”

This Senate bill is in the Judiciary Committee, chaired by anti-gun liberal Democrat Leahy. Lautenberg’s gun hate is well documented and he says you are irrational if you support private gun sales.

“There is no rational reason to oppose closing the loophole. The reason it’s still not closed is simple: the continuing power of the special interest gun lobby in Washington” Sen. Lautenberg said ignoring the Constitution.

Lautenberg and the Gun Grabbers in the Senate are now tying to use the GAO to justify putting Americans on a secret gun ban list.

LAUTENBERG’S MOTIVES

Motives for his latest gun ban to are twofold:

  • First, he is taking small steps to enact gun control legislation this is just one step.
  • Second, eradicate the gun culture altogether.

All that seems to be on the minds of the Anti-Gun Senators and at the offices of gun control extremists is figuring out how to invade your privacy to erode and eventually destroy the right, and the means, of self-defense.

Now the Anti-Gun Coalitions are trying to use a self supporting GAO study to destroy the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms to protect themselves under the law. They are attacking and hiding behind an Anti-Terrorist Agenda while getting political and financial support from:

George Soros a Hungarian-born billionaire bank rolling efforts with his check book and spending more that $100 million to destroy the Constitution.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA) admitted that “guns would be banned and confiscated” if she could have her way.

The United Nations actively pushes globalism seeking to disarm all Americans.

We must Stop the Anti-Gun Coalition and get ready for the biggest gun control fight of the year from coast to coast. We can not do that without your support.

Stand up against this attack! Stand up for the right to not only defend yourself, but to defend your family, your children, your friends, and your classmates!

Alan Gottlieb
Chairman
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Bill Ritter 180 sanity revisited?

July 3, 2009

What does it take to restore fiscal sanity when RINO’s and Democrats get a free hand with tax and spend policy? Colorado has over the past few years been somewhat protected by The Taxpayer Bill of Rights, more commonly known by the acronym TABOR. This past session of the legislature saw TABOR pretty much gutted. It also saw the advent of special interest legislation reaching new heights of recklessness. Not to even bother mentioning the use of “fees” to circumvent TABOR restrictions. Before leaving Colorado I briefly thought of using the initiative process to re-define the word taxation in that any charge by government at any level would be deemed a “tax.” That went nowhere. Now, the Colorado legislature, and the state of Colorado are also going nowhere. I have often had disagreements with Governor Bill Ritter about issues that span the entire realm of politics. Now, in a perfect example of broken clock economics the Governor like a broken clock that exhibits the correct time twice on a daily basis he get’s the correct answer.

Hat tip, and thanks to Senator Ted Harvey for this.

For Immediate Release                                         Contact: Ted Harvey
Ted@tedharvey.com

Bill Ritter 180


The day has come.  The numbers are in.  With only one week remaining in the 08/09 fiscal year, the Colorado budget is $250 million in the red.  Once again Governor Ritter and the Democrat legislative leadership misjudged the depth of our economic downturn.  Despite Republican warnings and objections during the last legislative session, the Democrats chose to approve the largest budget in state history.

At a time when small businesses were cutting budgets, reducing expenses, laying off staff or closing their doors altogether, the Democrat legislature grew the Colorado budget by 4% more than the previous year and hired 250 new employees.
While Colorado families were struggling through these tough economic times, the Democrats increased taxes and fees on all Coloradoans by $1 billion, raided the state’s trust funds and emergency reserves – and even tried unsuccessfully to seize $500 million in assets from the Pinnacol Assurance Company, Colorado’s largest provider of workers compensation insurance.  They also took advantage of their majority to remove the 6% spending cap that has controlled government growth for over three decades – a mechanism that has protected Colorado from the kind of out-of-control spending that has pushed states like California to the brink of bankruptcy.

Adding insult to injury, last month the Democrats handed out $30,000 in staff bonuses and spent nearly $4,000 in public funds on a “team-building” retreat.
The 2009 legislative session was a prime example of unchecked Democrat power on parade.

When actual revenues came in $250 million short of expectations, one would have expected Colorado taxpayers to receive an apology from the Governor and the Democrat leadership for their fiscal mismanagement.  Sadly, there were no apologies. Instead, taxpayers were treated to another serving of the Democrats’ brand of faith-based budgeting.

On the day the actual budget numbers came out, the Governor held a press conference explaining that the state would balance the $250 million shortfall by utilizing federal stimulus funding and pushing off payment of the state’s payroll from June 30 (the last day of 2008-2009 fiscal year), until July 1 (the first day of the new fiscal year).  Of course the only thing this did was add $250 million to the already anticipated $140 million shortfall for the new fiscal year-making the state $390 million in the hole from day one! This was simply Enron bookkeeping to avoid making the tough choices and leaving Colorado taxpayers to pick up the tab.
The Governor then rebuffed any media questions regarding an immediate special legislative session to balance our growing deficit.  He continued to insist that the problem could wait until the legislature reconvened in January.  Unfortunately, the Governor failed to admit that delaying for another six months until the start of the 2010 session would only magnify the impact any impending cuts would have on the state budget.

Sadly, the Democrat legislative response was no better.  The only suggestion from the Chairman of the Joint Budget Committee was to extend a property tax increase on senior citizens for another year, and remove tax credits from business owners.
The truth is, on the Day of Reckoning, when the actual budget numbers came out, our Colorado Democrat leadership revealed their true soul and proved once and for all that they were incapable of cutting even one government service or one state employee.

Predictably, the public was outraged.  The lack of Democrat leadership was undeniable.  Faced with an economic reality and voter rebellion, Governor Ritter quickly realized that it was time for government to tighten its belt.
On Thursday, only two days after his initial response, the Governor held another press conference…one that I have dubbed “Bill Ritter 180.”  Surprisingly, he announced what Republicans had been demanding for over two years, that he was directing each of his department heads to review their budgets and cut 10% across the board.  Hallelujah, the leader of our state finally showed leadership! And may God bless him for it. He may have just saved our great state from following California’s lead…straight off the cliff.
Indeed it has been our Republican legislators who have led the charge for fiscal sanity over the last 24 months while pushing for across-the-board cuts…but this week we must give credit to whom credit is due.  Bill Ritter has finally taken a stand and come out against many members of his own party.  Good for him and good for Colorado!
#####
For more information on Senator Ted Harvey please visit his website at www.tedharvey.com


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 168 other followers

%d bloggers like this: