Right -Wing Socialism

The more George Bush makes great proclamations about his achievements in spreading democracy and freedom to the world, the more our liberties at home are being chiseled away. Bush may be on the path to liberate the world, but, he is in fact enslaving Americans at a rate that would make any hard core liberal proud of his record. In fact, if Bush's vision of American interventionism continues as part of the foreign policy landscape,Americans will virtually become the world's slaves before he leaves office. It is nowhere written in the Constitution that it is America's responsibility to foot the bill to provide freedom to the rest of the world.
We already have a massive federal deficit that is growing thanks to our government leaders,including our august president,and now his plan is to continue to give billions,soon to be trillions of your money to aid foreign nations that neither have the means(education),or the will to implement the American model of democracy that has been successful for over two hundred years. They only see the U.S. as some fat cat tossing them scraps. Bush thinks, as have others before him,that by giving the rest of the world our wealth,and our 'model' that some how they will see the error of their ways,and the world will be a "safer place for democracy"(Wilson),and thus will be more secure,and less anti-American.

We only have to look at western Europe to see the failure of this policy(The Marshall Plan),and the resentment that has been engendered.
"Read my lips" Mr. Bush,either way,Left or Right,socialism does'nt work at home or abroad! The Revolution will not be televised.

Article One Section Eight

Too often we speak of the constitutional limitations of the federal government as though citizens/readers know what Congress may do as listed in Article One Section Eight of the Constitution.Few people that I know of actually do. Most have not read anything of it since their high school days,and then were often taught by teachers that knew little more about it than they did.In light of the present"crisis"in misunderstanding,it would seem that there is no better time than now to become re-acquainted with this most important of documents.

Remember that every elected government official swears to " uphold the Constitution"before he or she takes office. If they proceed to ignore the limits of Article One Section Eight,they are guilty of lying under oath. Lying under oath is perjury. Perhaps someone should send George Bush a copy? The Revolution will not be televised.

The Crisis

These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value.

You would think these words were writted by the likes of Cal Thomas or George Will. Without discussing its obvious application to the war, it applies as well to the ever-increasing burden of socialist programs that have choked us of our freedom and liberty over the last century.

But they weren't. These words were written in 1776 by Thomas Paine, a man still revered today for his words of wisdom penned during the American Revolution.

There is a war on, and it's not being fought in Iraq or Afghanistan. It's being fought right here in our great Nation. It is a time where we, as a people, must choose the direction that will be followed by our children and grandchildren. This is not a war being fought with weapons of mass destruction, nor is it being fought with the precision-guided missiles that are keeping those who would harm us from actually doing so.

This war is a war of beliefs and ideas. The belief system first established in America by the Founding Fathers has been under assault for nearly 100 years, and finally, there is an opportunity for their America to prevail.

The American left has gradually chipped away at American freedom in the interest of replacing our freedoms with socialism. Make no mistake about it. When the word "program" comes out of the mouth of any politician, simply replace the word "socialism". Want to balance the budget (2005 Federal Budget)? Cut out everything that's not constitutional. Projected spending growth in 2005 is $255 billion unconstitutional vs. $128 billion, and that's just the numbers that I know for sure. That's about two thirds of the considered budget growth, not even the actual figures! Just cutting that out could free up over $100 billion for deficit reduction and/or increased constitutional spending. And that's just if you cut out the GROWTH.

The only constitutional "programs" are those involving the military, embassies, and that which is needed to pay the bills for utilities and salaries of constitutionally mandated government officials.

We really need to replace the "summer soldiers" and "sunshine patriots" in Washington with people who have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for the Constitution. Dismantling these socialist encroachments, even if it has to happen over time, is the right thing to do. Those willing to stand up to those who are trying to continue the erosion of our freedoms deserve our unending gratitude and thanks.

Tyranny is not easily conquered, but our Founding Fathers were able to do it, and so are we. Just remember: the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.

RWR

Leviathan and Libertarian

The Indian stands free, and unconstrained in nature, is her inhabitant and not her guest,and hence wears her easily,and gracefully. But the 'civilized" man has the habits of the house. His house is his prison. There must be a posting of the guard lest he escape. And so we have the origin of government.

I put forth the premise that "he who is governed least is governed best", and that he who is truly governed best of all is not governed at all except by that celestial fire called conscience, which owes allegiance to no other authority than its own understanding of that which it calls God.I,therefore, move that all government must have its origin, and therefore its authority in and by that understanding.In other words, my right to define what I consider to be "the pursuit of happiness" comes from what I call, and understand to be "God".

The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes called the institution of human government "Leviathan", which by definition is a "monster often representing evil intentions". Thus, every good intention of a truly civilized man must be to throw off any attempt by this "monster" to devour him. So, how does it become a man to behave toward this American government, this modern-day "leviathan", this usurper of the soul?

My answer to that fundamental question which will so heavily determine any future course of action is that he cannot, without disgrace, be associated with it. And as we should be men first, and subjects afterward, it is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. A man in the right constitutes a majority of one.

By definition,a libertarian is quite simply "a person who believes in liberty of thought, and action",in other words, a person who believes that his thoughts are worth putting into action,at least for him. If he is right, which I believe he will be if he allows others to do the same,he will then place himself in the best possible position to achieve the end of any definition he may have constituting the pursuit of whatever he may call happiness.Essentially,he advances the thought,and some of you may find this controversial,that freedom is the natural state of man,pure and unencumbered, without limitations, or boundaries save by that which is placed there by himself.

A prudent man will never leave that which is right to the mercy of chance, nor will he expect it to prevail through the power of any said majority. There is little of anything that can pass for truth in the action of even a democratic mass. The Declaration of Independence put forth the notion that "all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights,that among these are life,liberty,and the pursuit of happiness". The Constitution was created to protect these rights. My take on that is that since I have decided to build the prison(house) that I am living in, it would behoove me to be the guard that keeps my gate and lock, and that I need not be subordinate to any man in this regard,and that ultimately, the degree of freedom that remains to me will be in direct proportion to that which I keep to myself.

I think the founding brothers would be smiling. I also think most of them would be Libertarians today for the same reasons that I am.Today's rendition of the Democratic and Republican parties offer only slightly different versions of similar failed,unconstitutional practices. Both of them are promoting more,and bigger government, with an ongoing assault on the remaining civil liberties at home,while pursuing a policy of entangling alliances, and unnecessary military actions abroad.It would seem the present American Left is no longer content with their usurpation of the word "liberal"which previously referred to a person who believed in "free markets and social tolerance",and is now attempting to steal the word "libertarian" to apply to classical liberals to describe themselves.

The Republican Right is no better. They project the image of defending our rights as they are guaranteed by the Constitution, while in reality quietly continuing the advance of the nanny state,conducting illegal pre-emptive military strikes,and enforcing federal mandates that are a violation of personal freedom and the privacy of individual citizens. All in direct opposition to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution which they have sworn under oath to protect. True libertarianism,simply stated,means that a man has the right to be left alone in the life he has chosen,and as such, has only the obligations that he has consented to accept.

While some may find this vague in its application, it is in effect,the ultimate "declaration of independence" from all tyranny in its many forms. To a libertarian,there isn't nearly enough difference between Democrats and Republicans to override the fact that they are both in league with the enemies of freedom, and under those circumstances neither can justify any pretensions of intellectual superiority. This is the reason that anyone who genuinely believes that freedom is a gift from God,and not a grant from man,has to be Libertarian, as there is no other choice.

The Revolution will not be televised.

Opening remarks and other thoughts from the back burner

Many thanks are in order here, more than I will attempt to address at this time! Suffice it to say thank you to my creator for any skills that I have or may demonstrate in this endeavor, and to my colleague for his willingness to include me as a co-conspiritor in what I believe to be a worthwhile endeavor, that being the institute of human government in all of its erstwhile forms and functions past, present,and future. There are many reasons why we should expend energy on these considerations, and one could wax philosophic for hours of the importance of deliberation, once again, suffice it to say that I really enjoy talking about this shit, and Rocker does too, so as often as our schedules allow,we get together,and
take notes. That's the great part about the whole thing, we learn from each other! And as an educator, it don't get any better than that! The Rocker is one of the few people that I know that can walk away from the table in disagreement, and still come back the next day in friendship, and
usually with another good perspective in support of what he believes to be the truth. You gotta love anybody who loves himself that much! In the end,
that was the reason that I decided to do this blog with him. As he has already said, we share many points of communion. Our differences, I think,
are to be found in our abiding trust of human nature,and thus perhaps, in the end, our inherent faith in ourselves. As I try to be honest in all of my conversations(let them be as of God), I need the help of every honest man. It takes two to speak the truth- one to speak,and one to hear. So to all of you who take the time to read these words, may they be a light unto your path, as they have been unto mine. The Revolution will not be televised.

Welcoming "The Old Sage"

Bloggers of the RWRepublic are victorious!

We have convinced "The Old Sage" to join the blogosphere!

This blog is set up so that only he and I can comment. However, I hope you will find his insight quite enlightening, regardless of whether you agree.

So who is "The Old Sage"?

Well, the name comes from a conservative mutual friend who recently returned from a tour of duty in the Middle East. I have referred to him on my blog as "Captain D", though he will be officially retiring from the military at the end of this month. I think I'll let him keep the nickname "Captain" though...

Anyway, "The Sage" and I have come to know each other through working together as teachers at a school here in NJ. He's got about 15 years of experience on me from a living standpoint, and he is a STAUNCH constitutionalist (just like I am). He is generally even less trusting of government than I am and even more conservative, as you will see now that he blogs. His influence from a writing standpoint shows clearly in my recent post, "This is Supposed to be a GOOD Thing?", over on my blog. This rant would have had a completely different flavor without his influence.

We tend to differ in a few areas, though very few. I tend to trust President Bush more than he does, though he will admit that where he disagrees, he hopes that he is wrong. He basically takes the Libertarian perspective most, if not all, of the time. So all you moonbats out there calling me a right-wing extremist are about to learn about why I'm not.

So, hopefully all will join me in welcoming The Old Sage to the blogosphere, and supporting everything he decides to do here!

RWR

Why We Have No "Constitutional Rights"

This piece was written by "The Old Sage" and is a great example of why I think he should be blogging. - RWR

A few minor edits have been made to this post in the interest of readability. Sage wrote this out as a "stream of consciousness", and I thought about it and its specifics a while before actually posting it. - RWR

I recently read an article in National Geographic magazine concerning a suit brought against the government by some of the five hundred or so prisoners held by the government at the US naval station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Some of the complaints include the use of "evidence" obtained by the use of torture which their attorneys have claimed is a violation of due process. Our government's position, as stated by Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Brian Boyle, is that the prisoners "have no constitutional rights enforceable in this, or any other, court of law". As I read those words, my first thought was, "of course they have no constitutional rights!"

There is no such thing as "constitutional rights" in this country! Our rights are not constitutional rights. The Founding Brothers never intended them to be. This country was founded under the premise that our rights are God-given, or natural. They are not gifts from any government; they are not granted by the constitution. Now, there are constitutional rights in Canada, the UK, France, Russia, and a host of other countries around the world. In those countries, both the people and the governments consider their rights to be gifts from the government, and thus subject to government approval. The United States in the only country in all of history that was set up with the philosophy that rights are God-given, and not man-given. Nowhere does the constitution say that we are being granted any rights from any said government body. Whenever rights are mentioned, it says only that the government cannot deprive us of them. Nowhere does it say that any of our rights are particularly American, either, but rather that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" ... that, my dear friends, is the philosophical and legal basis of this country!

So ... what is the deal with the constitution and the Bill of Rights? The Federalists, Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Madison and company, didn't want one because they feared that any rights specifically not included would be denied, and the government would then begin acting as if the government itself, and the constitution in particular, would be seen as the source of rights. Thus, the rights of the people would be man-given, not God-given as was intended. On the other hand, the Democrats, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and others, wanted a Bill of Rights because they feared that without it the government would eventually assume that individual rights didn't exist and would, in effect, usurp the power of the people.

The compromise to make sure that "the unnamed rights" were not ignored was the Ninth Amendment, which states that "the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people". The bad news is that the fears of both the Federalists and the Democrats have become reality.

Government lawyers, beaureaucrats, congressmen, presidents, and even the courts, spend an incredible amount of time (and your money) trying to circumvent the one thing that has made the United States unique in history! They have arrived at the view that:

* any right not specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights doesn't exist,
* the rights that are mentioned are very pliable,
* the Ninth Amendment is dead (ignored),

and worst of all ...

* the Constitution, i.e., the government, is now the source of our rights.

That's how other countries treat rights, and in every way, we are becoming more and more like the rest of the world!

Our government claims to be fighting for freedom and democracy in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. Wouldn't it, perhaps, be a better idea to finish the job at home first before we take it to the rest of the world? If the government really believes that those they hold at Guantanamo are a threat, then we must allow them their "inalienable" rights and their day in court. Make the government close what is, in essence, the same type of concentration camp in which we illegally held Japanese-Americans during World War II. Let the government make its case against those it holds in front of the American people for all the world to see. Those among the prisoners that they can prove guilty, let them be sentenced, or shot, or whatever else they deem necessary to do with them, then let the rest have their God-given rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of whatever they consider to be happiness".

It's not just the rights of those detained at Guantanamo that we're talking about here, folks, but the rights that our Founding Brothers said belong to all of us!!! If we don't wake up and smell the coffee of government abuses and usurpations perpetrated by this and previous administrations; if we don't change our mindset; if we refuse to draw a line in the sand and say, "No more," then we are going to wake up one day and find all our "God-given" rights gone. What will be left are the rights that politicians and lawyers want us to have, rights that they can rescind any time they find them inconvenient, rights that have become nothing more than privileges granted by governments like the rest of the world has - none at all! For this to happen, not one word of the Constitution, nor the Declaration of Independence, will ever have to be changed. All they will have to do is ignore them.

TOS

Let me know what you think ... post a comment on this post.
RWR