Tag Archives: Independence Day

Obama Co-Opts Independence Day

Trans-Day-590-LI

Trans-Day-590-LIIndependence Day is for celebrating the freedoms so many have fought to defend, but today, President Obama is co-opting  it to promote his own agenda.

President Barack Obama plans to highlight a positive side of the immigration debate by presiding over an Independence Day citizenship ceremony for service members who signed up to defend the U.S. even though they weren’t American citizens.

The idea of show casing the successes of legal immigrants in order to push for amnesty are hypocritical at best and political show boating at worst.

The service members receiving citizenship all went through the proper process. Legal immigration and naturalization. Obama seeks to reward millions of illegal immigrants with the same status without all the trouble of doing it right.

Disregard for the nation’s laws is and should be grounds for rejection of a request for citizenship.

Efforts on immigration reform should be centered on streamlining. Make the process faster and easier so that those that wish to legally immigrate to the United States can do so with less frustration. Allowing millions to jump ahead of those that have been lawfully following the existing process is not the answer.

New Version of National Anthem to be Revealed Tonight

John Williams

John WilliamsRenowned composer and director, John Williams will unveil a new arrangement of “The Star-Spangled Banner” – the national anthem of the United States of America.

Tonight, during “The Capitol Fourth”  celebration, Mr. Williams will direct the talents of the National Symphony Orchestra, U.S. Army Herald Trumpets, Choral Arts Society of Washington, and Joint Armed Forces Chorus while they perform his new version of Francis Scott Key’s song.

This marks the 200th anniversary of the “Star-Spangled Banner.”

For those not in Washington D.C. this evening, you can watch the celebration on PBS beginning at 8pm Eastern Time.

As We Approach 237

As we approach Independence Day 2013, this might be a good time to take stock on the American experience: where we are, where we came from, what we are supposed to be and what we have become, collectively, as a country. It wouldn’t be a stretch to say that the United States of America has become something other than what our Founders and Framers would have envisioned. In fact, it could be argued that the “old white guys in wigs” would not only be shocked for what we have become, but for our apathy in allowing our country to become what it is.

Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying:

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have.”

Today, the United States federal government is so large and so intrusive that it not only employs 4.4 million people, but holds a national debt of over $16.8 trillion dollars. This does not address a $124.6 trillion unfunded liabilities mandate. These numbers appear shocking because they are shocking. And when one takes into consideration that each year the US federal government operates “in the red,” even though they glean $2.902 trillion in revenue from various sources (individual income tax being the primary source at $1.359 trillion), one can only conclude that the federal government has taken on the role of the arrogant spendthrift, and one that disavows Benjamin Franklin’s sentiment, “When you run in debt; you give to another power over your liberty.”

But perhaps the whole of our modern American experience can be summed up in the end state of this quote by Thomas Jefferson:

“A departure from principle becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of society is reduced to mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering…And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.”

Taxation
In the formative days of our Great American Experiment, the Founders and Framers set up a federal government limited in its authority and scope. In fact, in the early days of our Republic the federal government operated almost completely on revenues gleaned from tariffs and trade. It wasn’t until the 19th Century that the “income tax” would come to be and even then, until the passage of the 19th Amendment, the constitutionality of the income tax was held in question.

Today, thanks to an inequitable tax system – the Progressive tax system – we have a populace that is purposefully divided into factions: one that pays federal taxes, another that avoids paying federal taxes, and yet another that believes the taxes collected are due them. In a land where everyone is supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law (read: government), we have allowed those who we elect to office to literally create a class system, through which they manipulate the citizenry for political gain and the retention of power.

Religion
To say that the United States of America was founded on deep-rooted desire for the individual to be free to practice the religion of his or her choosing is to understate the importance of the issue. Truth be told, the issue of religious freedom delivered pilgrims to American shores centuries before. The Founders and Framers, being deeply reverent men – much to the opposite of claims by the secularists of today – understood all too well the importance of not only freedom of religion (the natural law right to worship in the dogma of choice) but the idea of recognizing something larger than self where government was concerned. As our founding documents – the Charters of Freedom – are predicated on the understanding and acknowledgment of Natural Law (the acknowledgement of a Higher Power), it is only the intellectually dishonest who argue religion did not (and does not) play a significant role in the government of our Republic.

To wit, The Declaration of Independence states:

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

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…” (emphasis added)

Yet, today, military chaplains are forbidden from even displaying a Bible on their government issued desks for the ignorance of history served up at the hands of Progressive and secular activists.

Today, because of an activist Judicial Branch (and at the urging of Progressive and secular activists), the innocent notion of a separation of Church and State, which in its original intent was meant to reassure one denomination that another would not be placed above it in an establishment of a “national religion,” i.e. the Church of England, has been grotesquely distorted to require the ever-increasing banishment of all religious symbols from the public square. And at the same time, the federal government – in the form of ever-expanding entitlements – seeks to replace the Creator as the Alpha and the Omega for the American citizenry.

Law
At our country’s inception, the Judiciary – the Judicial Branch and all federal courts in its charge – was to administer federal law in the context of constitutionality. Was it constitutional or what is not? Or was the question reserved for the States and the judiciaries of those States, per the 10th Amendment?

Today, our entire legal system – federal as well as the lessers – is held hostage to a system of precedent law; Stare decisis et non quieta movere, a Latin term meaning “to stand by decisions and not disturb the undisturbed.” This is understood to mean that courts should abide by decided precedent and not disturb settled matters, regardless of whether the decision was born of activism. If the judiciary produced judgments and opinions that had fidelity to the Constitution – as the Constitution mandates, then the notion of stare decisis would be a good thing. But those who serve in the Judiciary are equally subject to human intellectual infirmities as are those who serve in the Executive and Legislative Branches. Truth is, one decision based on ideologically; one activist decision, forever moves law away from the Constitution.

As Steven G. Calabresi, a professor of law at Northwestern University School of Law and a visiting professor at Brown University, opined in a paper titled, Text vs. Precedent in Constitutional Law, published the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy:

“The argument…is that the doctrinalists are wrong in arguing for a strong theory of stare decisis for three reasons. First, there is nothing in the text, history, or original meaning of the Constitution that supports the doctrinalists’ strong theory of stare decisis. Second, the actual practice of the US Supreme Court is to not follow precedent, especially in important cases. In other words, precedent itself counsels against following precedent. And, third, a strong theory of stare decisis is a bad idea for policy reasons…

“Both textualism and originalism supply arguments as to why following precedent is wrong. As for the text, it is striking that there is not a word in the Constitution that says in any way that precedent trumps the text.”

Yet, decisions on issues from voting rights to life-ending procedures, social issues to mandatory health insurance are continuously based on precedent law, or stare decisis. And with each decision that bows to stare decisis, we move further away from fidelity to the Constitution.

Self-Reliance
At the founding of our nation, our citizenry was comprised on those who wanted the freedom to build, to create, to glean the benefits of their labors based on the effort with which they sought success. Pride was not the product of artificially installed self-esteem, but a humble condition of dignity, arrived at through determination, education – sometimes, or most times autodidactic – and perseverance. The United States was a nation of strong individuals, determined to embrace the freedom – the liberty, that the New World afforded them; a nation of people with a commonality based on self-reliance and a brotherhood born of the love of liberty and justice for all, not just the oligarchic few.

Today, our country has devolved into a socialistic nanny-state, complete with an entitlement faction that will very soon not only outnumber Ayn Rand’s “producers” but a faction that celebrates its gluttony; its piggish appetite for entitlement, even as they scheme to avoid the responsibility of maintaining the Republic; even as they demand more from a government whose seemingly sole purpose is to concoct new ways to extract wealth from those who produce. Today, 47% of the nation’s people do not pay federal income taxes. Today, 23 million households are dependent on food stamps. Today, nearly 49 percent of the citizenry lives in a household where at least one member receives a direct benefit from the federal government.

That those duly elected to office exploit this societal malady for purposes of maintaining power is tantamount to a betrayal of the very principles held by those who gifted us the exquisite beauty of liberty. I wonder, if the Founders and Framers could confront the elitist oligarchs of today’s American ruling class, would they be strong enough to do so with temperance?

On this, the 237th anniversary of the American Declaration of Independence, we would be wise to self-examine our national condition. Do we really want to be a nanny-state? Do we really want to admire a legal system that moves further away for the very basis for our freedom with each decision? Do we really want to support a government that increasingly steals from the producers to give to the dependent class of their own creation, and for purely ideological and politically motivated purposes? Do we want to be a nation that stands arrogantly in its belief that We the People – or They the Government – are the highest power to which we must answer, therefore abandoning our God-given right to acknowledge Natural Law?

In 1964, future president Ronald Reagan gave a speech titled, A Time for Choosing, in which he said:

“We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.

“They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right….

“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.”

Today, my fellow Americans is Independence Day. Please, think about it.

Happy Birthday America?

US Constitution - We The People

Timothy Tolle (CC)

Timothy Tolle (CC)

This week we celebrate 237 years of existence. We celebrate a great experiment. Our founding fathers signed their death warrant on July 4th, 1776. Would you have done the same?

When MOST Americans think of “The Founding Fathers” they think of about 8 or 9 courageous guys, usually Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Hancock, and maybe a couple of other. But there were actually 57 men that signed their death warrant.

Our founders were not ignorant, Bible-thumping, gun-toting fools. They came from all walks of life. Some were lawyers, some were doctors, and some career politicians. A large number of them made their income from agricultural work, whether it was a large plantation in the south or a small farm somewhere. They were a great cross mix of the people who made up early America.

So, let’s just kick the snot out of those men (and women) who gave everything for our ability and freedom to be ignorant today!

Today revisionist historians and others would have you believe that religion played a negative role in the founding of this country or that our founding fathers didn’t want any part of religion in government. Lies, all lies!

Our founding fathers wanted freedom of religion and worship. They didn’t want to legislate that all must be Christians, but wanted to ensure that God had place and recognition in the founding of this great nation.

At our 150th anniversary celebration of the Declaration of Independence, President Calvin Coolidge affirmed:

“No one can examine this record and escape the conclusion that in the great outline of its principles the Declaration was the result of the religious teachings of the preceding period. . . . They are found in the texts, the sermons, and the writings of the early colonial clergy who were earnestly undertaking to instruct their congregations in the great mystery of how to live. . . . Placing every man on a plane where he acknowledged no superiors, where no one possessed any right to rule over him, he must inevitably choose his own rulers through a system of self-government”

John Adams stated this about our “Godless” nation:

“Independence Day “ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forevermore.”

How does one spin that to Adams and others wanting nothing to do with God? It could only be because they have a personal agenda. But that is a piece for another day.

Mr. Adams, along with many other founding fathers, wanted us to give thanks to the God that gave us victory over the British, and gave us independence. Many of them were praying men and if you read what they (the founding fathers) wrote, you would find that what the revisionist historians write is actually false.

As I searched the internet for quotes from our founding fathers I found hundreds of great quotes. When I added the word “religion” something changed. The first 3 pages were filled with anti-Christian quotes from the founding fathers, posted by mostly atheist and agnostic groups, groups that want no part of religion. Interesting? Well, what else would you expect them to post?

It’s very clear in the founders’ personal writings that they were Godly men who wanted all people to be free to pursue a life of happiness and prosperity, worshiping (or not) freely, without having to make the same sacrifices that they did.

So while you’re sitting there burning your burger or “getting your tan on” at the beach, think about those men who started this country, the principles they founded it upon, and think about what they gave up for your freedom. Do your own research! Don’t let “historians” ever rewrite history.

Happy Birthday and God Bless America!

Chris Rock’s Atrocious Bashing of Independence Day

Shame on You Chris Rock

Shame on You Chris Rock

Last Wednesday, patriotic Americans all over the country celebrated our  236th birthday, however, some on the left couldn’t help themselves, but to expose their ignorance about our nation’s founding.  Chris Rock is at the epicenter of this debacle.  He crudely tweeted “Happy white peoples independence day the slaves weren’t free but I’m sure they enjoyed fireworks.”  Well, Mr. Rock, slavery is known as America’s original sin, but to criticize every caucasian in the country who had no part in enslaving Africans during the slave trade, is beyond absurd.  Hence, why slave reparations legislation is asinine.  I still don’t know why Chris Rock or other members of the Hollywood Left continue to bash the very foundation that has allowed them to prosper in this country.  I don’t know why they keep on dwelling the imperfections of the men who founded our nation.  Our Declaration of Independence based our nation’s founding on an inherent set of rights in an age where such entities were founded on the words monarchs or ethnic groups.  It was revolutionary.  Yes, slavery was unresolved, but that was not the issue at hand.  However, that is not to say that the political class, throughout our history, has a bad habit of sweeping pressing issues under the rug.  Regrettably, it took the collapse of our republic and 600,000 American lives to settle the issue.  Yet, it was abolished forever and codified in our constitution.

However, before the outbreak of the Civil War, future president Abraham Lincoln’s July 10th speech during his 1858 Senate bid embraced the true meaning inherent in the Declaration of Independence that Chris Rock feels white people neglect stating:

Now, it happens that we meet together once every year, sometime about the 4th of July, for some reason or other. These 4th of July gatherings I suppose have their uses. If you will indulge me, I will state what I suppose to be some of them.

We are now a mighty nation, we are thirty—or about thirty millions of people, and we own and inhabit about one-fifteenth part of the dry land of the whole earth. We run our memory back over the pages of history for about eighty-two years and we discover that we were then a very small people in point of numbers, vastly inferior to what we are now, with a vastly less extent of country,—with vastly less of everything we deem desirable among men,—we look upon the change as exceedingly advantageous to us and to our posterity, and we fix upon something that happened away back, as in some way or other being connected with this rise of prosperity. We find a race of men living in that day whom we claim as our fathers and grandfathers; they were iron men, they fought for the principle that they were contending for; and we understood that by what they then did it has followed that the degree of prosperity that we now enjoy has come to us. We hold this annual celebration to remind ourselves of all the good done in this process of time of how it was done and who did it, and how we are historically connected with it; and we go from these meetings in better humor with ourselves—we feel more attached the one to the other, and more firmly bound to the country we inhabit. In every way we are better men in the age, and race, and country in which we live for these celebrations. But after we have done all this we have not yet reached the whole. There is something else connected with it. We have besides these men—descended by blood from our ancestors—among us perhaps half our people who are not descendants at all of these men, they are men who have come from Europe—German, Irish, French and Scandinavian—men that have come from Europe themselves, or whose ancestors have come hither and settled here, finding themselves our equals in all things. If they look back through this history to trace their connection with those days by blood, they find they have none, they cannot carry themselves back into that glorious epoch and make themselves feel that they are part of us, but when they look through that old Declaration of Independence they find that those old men say that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,” and then they feel that that moral sentiment taught in that day evidences their relation to those men, that it is the father of all moral principle in them, and that they have a right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh of the men who wrote that Declaration [loud and long continued applause], and so they are. That is the electric cord in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together, that will link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of freedom exists in the minds of men throughout the world. [Applause.]

Now, sirs, for the purpose of squaring things with this idea of “don’t care if slavery is voted up or voted down” [Douglas’s “popular sovereignty” position on the extension of slavery to the territories], for sustaining the Dred Scott decision [A voice—“Hit him again”], for holding that the Declaration of Independence did not mean anything at all, we have Judge Douglas giving his exposition of what the Declaration of Independence means, and we have him saying that the people of America are equal to the people of England. According to his construction, you Germans are not connected with it. Now I ask you in all soberness, if all these things, if indulged in, if ratified, if confirmed and endorsed, if taught to our children, and repeated to them, do not tend to rub out the sentiment of liberty in the country, and to transform this Government into a government of some other form. Those arguments that are made, that the inferior race are to be treated with as much allowance as they are capable of enjoying; that as much is to be done for them as their condition will allow. What are these arguments? They are the arguments that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old serpent that says you work and I eat, you toil and I will enjoy the fruits of it. Turn in whatever way you will—whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it is all the same old serpent, and I hold if that course of argumentation that is made for the purpose of convincing the public mind that we should not care about this, should be granted, it does not stop with the negro. I should like to know if taking this old Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon principle and making exceptions to it where will it stop. If one man says it does not mean a negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man? If that declaration is not the truth, let us get the Statute book, in which we find it and tear it out! Who is so bold as to do it! [Voices—“me” “no one,” &c.] If it is not true let us tear it out! [cries of “no, no,”] let us stick to it then [cheers], let us stand firmly by it then. [Applause.]

 This was part of  a series of debates between Lincoln and incumbent Democrat Stephen Douglas, who supported popular sovereignty concerning slave issues and the notion that “this government of ours is founded on the white basis. It was made by the white man, for the benefit of the white man, to be administered by white men, in such manner as they should determine.”  I feel Mr. Rock hasn’t read much, or frankly doesn’t care, about our history.  The religious waves that spawned the abolition movement or the brave political leaders who felt the practice immoral and evil.  However,  labeling conservatives, patriots, or anything celebrating America as racist isn’t a new behavior exuded with the left.

This tactic was used to change the narrative when the health care debate was in full swing.  Liberals tried to label the Tea Party  acist back in 2009 and 2010.  It centered on the now debunked event of the “N’-Word” being hurled at Rep. John Lewis that caught on with the dead tree media, who foams at the mouth over such frivolous accusations, and diluted the message away from the rampant spending and pending government takeover of health care that was occurring in Washington. It details a disturbing turn in American politics with the institutional left.  It shows they are willing to engage and channel into the darkest parts of our nature. With the latest jobs report further demonstrating the failure of this president’s policies to revive the economy, the left has no where else to go.  They can’t spin the facts so they turn to the one thing that is anathema to society.  It’s vicious and wrong.  Whoever is accused of racism on our side will be compelled to prove that he isn’t and pivot away from the single issue that will sink this president’s chances of re-election.  It’s a winning strategy.

Hence why the left, especially Hollywood liberals, use racism to attack conservatives.  The more time we spend defending ourselves or one another, the more we waste in attacking the left leading up to Election Day.  While some conservatives continue to have conniptions over progressive jargon spewed over Twitter, keep in mind how the left benefits from you wasting your time combating such petulance.  Luckily, we have the facts and Joe Williams, formerly of Politico, to thank in blunting future attacks since his Twitter feed showed a long campaign of race baiting that he described as the “secret sauce in the Politico s**tburger.”  Regardless, they left is bound to use this tactic so many times it will lose it’s effect in the news cycle. After all, with an economy suffering from an unemployment rate of over eight percent for the past forty months, of which twenty-six of those months saw unemployment above nine percent, it’s going to be harder to deploy that tactic.

My Kind of Indoctrination – Happy Independence Day

Patio on Independence Day

Old Glory is being blown by a gentle breeze, the smell of brisket, burgers and sausage waft through the air. It’s fourth of July and it’s a big deal in the Mitchell family.

It isn’t all about the stars and stripes banners hanging on the patio. It isn’t even the food. It’s sharing the greatest day in American history with some of the greatest Americans I know.

Since I can remember, Independence day has been an unannounced, no-invitations sent nor needed, family reunion. Four generations share stories and just catch up.

Conversation on politics and world events inevitably ensue and even in a closely-related set of Conservatives have differing ideas on how to solve the myriad of problems facing America.

Discussions of the Constitution and elections are intermingled with accounts of recent fishing, hunting, hiking and camping trips. Obviously, we are accidentally doing exactly what a Harvard Study said we do – we are indoctrinating our children and each other as American patriots.

The indoctrination is subtle, but it’s there. We are teaching our kids to disagree with their government when it gets too big, does too much, or limits liberties. We are teaching them that debate about our government is healthy and can be had and should be had. We are teaching our children that they are a part of the political system.

When we question the validity of the electoral college system, one-man one-vote, NATO and the U.N. we aren’t telling each other or our kids what to think. We often disagree on the problem or solution on many things. Instead, we are reminding everyone in attendance that they must be actively learning about and participating in the future of our Republic

That is my kind of indoctrination. My kind of Independence Day.