“….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, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their 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 are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpation's, 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.”
Our founders said that when government uses despotic means to suppress the rights of the people, those rights that have been endowed to each individual by our Creator, by God, then we have not only the right but the duty to replace that government. The founders caution us, and they followed this same principle when designing our Constitution, that these serious actions must not be for transient causes. The Declaration of Independence declares without hesitation that people were never intended to live under the despotic demands of government in any form. They emphatically tell us that in our nation the purpose of government is not to limit or grant rights and liberties, they have already been granted by God, but the purpose of government is to protect those rights and liberties.
The founders reinforced this belief when the Bill of Rights was adopted. The first amendment states that congress shall make no law abridging these rights and liberties. When the founders said congress shall make no law, we must remember that the Constitution grants the right to legislate only to congress, not to the executive branch nor to the judicial branch. That would mean that the government has no right to abridge.
And we are reminded that The Declaration of Independence was not adopted on a whim or for transient causes but that the colonists had suffered greatly under the despotic actions of the King and Parliament, and had taken actions to attempt to correct these abuses and usurpation's.
“Nor have we been wanting in Attentions to our British Brethren. We have warned them from Time to Time of Attempts by their Legislature to extend an unwarrantable Jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the Circumstances of our Emigration and Settlement here. We have appealed to their native Justice and Magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the Ties of our common Kindred to disavow these Usurpation's, which, would inevitably interrupt our Connections and Correspondence. They too have been 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.”
Our founders stated without hesitation that we know that God created us and that it is God who has given us rights and liberties and not man nor government. Never had a nation been founded on such direct principles since the days Jesus walked on earth. Jefferson listed these as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Locke and others had listed these as life, liberty, and property. As we study natural law we learn that the right to private property, that very right vehemently denied by collectivists, communists, and Democrats, is paramount to freedom which is paramount to the pursuit of happiness.
“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 to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.”
We were not to be a nation ruled by bureaucrats, technocrats, judges, or any but the people. Eventually, eleven years later, a representative constitutional republic was established. The written law in the constitution was the final say on all questions. We would be a nation ruled by law and not by men.
The King did not adhere to these ideals of rule by law with the people being the final say on what powers the government would have.
He again refers to the King.
“He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good.”
“He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance, unless suspended in their Operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. “
“He has refused to pass other Laws for the Accommodation of large Districts of People, unless those People would relinquish the Right of Representation in the Legislature, a Right inestimable to them, and formidable to Tyrants only.”
“He has called together Legislative Bodies at Places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the Depository of their public Records, for the sole Purpose of fatiguing them into Compliance with his Measures.”
The King was doing things to negate the will of the people. We find our courts, our bureaucracy or executive, and yes even our legislative branch constantly negating the will of the people by not adhering to our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. In so many ways we are less free today than we were prior to July 4th, 1776.
If you are a scholar on the Declaration of Independence, if you have knowledge of the Declaration of Independence, or if you know nothing about the Declaration of Independence, I challenge you to spend some time relearning or learning what led to the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, and how many of the reasons we revolted from the King are now being imposed on us by our government.
I dare say that the Democrats and the RINOS of today would not have supported the Declaration of Independence. I say this, because they are imposing on us today many of the same restrictions and demands the King and the Parliament were imposing on the Colonists. The next couple of days I will be posting on this topic.
The opening statement of the Declaration says, “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 are today being denied by our government the powers, liberties, and rights that the Laws of Nature and the Laws of God to which we are entitled. People are being denied the right to life because we have designated the right to life to be the right of choice to end life.
Also, be sure to study the things the King had done to eliminate freedom and impose his will. For instance, it is stated that, “He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance.”
He refers to the King. A multitude of new offices could be the ATF, IRS, EPA, and even more the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, and the Department of Agriculture, all of which today have as their primary goal to limit the freedoms of the people and to enhance the power of government.
If you can justify a claim that one Democrat or one RINO of today would have supported the Declaration of Independence, please state your claim and support it logically with provable examples and not trite cliches. I am waiting.
Armed Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive (ATF) agents raided a gun store in Great Falls, Montana seizing all forms that hold buyer’s information during firearm transactions. We have since learned that there were 20 Armed IRS agents and 1 unarmed ATF agent. Logic would tell us that this was an IRS raid, not an ATF raid.
These agents confiscated all the 4473 forms, none of which contain any financial information; instead, the IRS now has access to these forms with sensitive personal details of every customer who purchased a firearm from Highwood Creek Outfitters. There were no assertions that the business had not paid taxes or had any violations on the tax returns they filed. Armed IRS agents, why????
The Constitution has been not just violated, but it has been overruled. We are now a nation run by bureaucracy. Communist nations are run by bureaucracy. We are a communist nation
How many of us remember watching the Rose Parade and the Rose Bowl on New Year’s Day as we sat inside our homes in the Midwest during the 1950’s and the 1960’s. We saw the sun was shining, the air temperature was heavenly and yes, we all said. “California is the place I ought to be.” We read in our newspapers and saw on the nightly news that California was the land of opportunity. Many of us had relatives who had moved to California and told us what we had seen and heard was true. They would then explain how they had the beach, the mountains, the fresh fruit, and all that is good within an hour or two drive or even in their backyard.
California was the land of milk and honey, the promised land. And then, the collectivist, the communist, told the people that things could be even better. The collectivist, the communist told the California people that those who come to California, those who work hard and take care of their families, those who came and made California the envy of the world because of hard work, dedication to family and country, and brought their Midwest beliefs and patriotism with them, were in fact oppressors, racists, haters, and interested only in self. They were evil is what the collectivist, the communist said.
The collectivist, the communist, took over the schools and indoctrinated the children to believe that their parents were evil because they believed in self-reliance and not government reliance. The children and grandchildren of those who came to California in the 1950’s and 1960’s were greatly influenced by the collectivist, communist movement that told them the achiever does so only so they can oppress others; that the achiever must be punished for their greed, that it is the primary responsibility of government to bring about total equality and that those who advocate for the punishment of the achiever must be placed in the position of power to bring about this equality.
Today we learn that San Francisco, a once beautiful and thriving city, the place where people would visit and leave their hearts, has few if any businesses left because of crime and other third world conditions thriving in the middle of the business center. We are told the real problem is not the criminal or the vagrant, they are victims, but it is the business owner who refuses to open their doors and their shelves to bring about equality.
California cities of any size, and many rural areas are losing population, not because of the topography and weather, but because of crime, vagrancy, terrible schools, and lack of opportunity, all those characteristics that are synonymous with collectivism, communism. 4 of every 10 people living in California are seriously considering leaving the state. Many have left. Those who are leaving are the achievers, those who believe in hard work and self-reliance, those who believe that solid families are critical, those who believe in the principles of the Bible and the United States Constitution. Those who are leaving are the people who build strong communities and states. Those who are replacing them are those who believe it is the obligation of the state, that it is the obligation of others to take care of them. They have bought into the failure sentence that they are victims, and they are owed by those they have been told are oppressing them.
The rest of the United States need only look at California to understand that the story of the collectivist, communist can only end in destruction, in failure. There is not one example that collectivism, communism, that which is now governing California, has ever resulted in less poverty, better conditions, less crime, or prosperity. What has been proven time after time is that individualism, individual freedom and liberty, always results in less poverty, better conditions, less crime, and more prosperity.
In order to correct the problems in California, and they can be corrected, a total reversal must take place. Public Sector Employee Unions must be forbidden. A complete and total cleanup of voting roles must occur. Mail out ballots must be eliminated. Voting must be restricted to one day using paper ballots. Voter ID must be vigorously enforced. A complete and honest audit of the state budget must happen with all waste of any kind eliminated. Taxes must be greatly reduced, and innovation and self-responsibility must be rewarded. The school must teach writing, math, reading and accurate history with all social glasses, especially sexual oriented classes eliminated immediately.
Yes, California can be saved. If saved, it will again become the state where people want to move. It will take a lot of work and grit, but it can be done. The question is, for which side will you fight? Will it be for the failed policies of collectivism, communism, or the proven policies of individualism and self-reliance?
When I use the term freedom, I mean that each individual is free to live their own life, to make their own choices, and to have their own thoughts and to be able to express those thoughts. One individuals’ freedom ends when they take away the freedom of another. Perhaps the most important right to secure freedom is for a person to be able to have their own thoughts and to express those thoughts. This would be freedom of speech.
When freedom of speech is taken, freedom is taken. The speech can be labeled however one side would wish to label it, but regardless of the label, freedom requires that it still be allowed to be spoken. Those who justify their right to limit speech, are in fact practicing arbitrary law.
Let me explain. The Constitution of the United States is very definite about freedom of speech. The first amendment says that we can have no restrictions on freedom of speech. So are we allowed to lie about other people, are we allowed to holler fire in a crowded theater. The answer to both questions is yes, and the law prohibits any law against either. When we make a law against either, we are then on the slippery slope we now find ourselves.
That does not mean that the person who lies or the person who hollers fire is not responsible for any harm that might result from their actions. Freedom requires that citizens be responsible for their actions. Freedom requires that the law be applied equally to the irresponsible regardless of their race, their gender, or their political affiliation. When we start to apply the law differently based on the above, then we are no longer based on rule of law, but we are now practicing arbitrary law. That means we are no longer living in a free society, but we are living in a dictatorial society, or a democratic society.
Democracy is a state of dictatorship. Those who are in power can and do dictate that those with whom they agree should be treated differently from whom those with whom they disagree. This is democracy, this is dictatorship, this is arbitrary law, this is not freedom.
The occupant of the White House said pertaining to Hunter Biden, "My son's a brilliant, honorable guy”. Yet we know Hunter is an abuser of drugs and women, he cheated on his tax returns, he lies on official documents, he refuses to support his child, and sells political influence to enrich himself and place the United States in danger. Is Joe Biden living in a make-believe world?
We are told that our borders are secure by those in power. “Border authorities are seeing a continued flow of migrants crossing into the U.S. that are from countries beyond Central America.” Headlines declare that numbers of illegals soar to new highs.
We are told inflation is under control and falling. Inflation for the month of May came in at an annual rate of 4% and the White House immediately and misleadingly tweeted that "inflation has fallen by more than half." In reality, inflation is increasing, not falling. New car prices for instance are up over 20% while used car prices are up over 40%. Food prices were up 7.7%.
We are told the world will end because of climate cooling, no climate warming, no let’s just say climate change. “For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong. In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent … and it never happened. And not once — not even once! — have these alarmists had one of their predictions come true.”
We are told that we can change gender because we choose to change. When a male is conceived, he has X and Y chromosome. When a female is conceived she has X and X chromosome. There is no way to change this so a male will always be a male and a female will always be a female no matter what they claim to choose.
We have elected people who believe and promote these make-believe ideas. These elected people have appointed others who believe and promote these make-believe ideas. People in the world have been indoctrinated to believe these make-believe ideas. Sadly, we live in a real world and must deal with real issues honestly.
Jill Biden was born in 1951 and seems to have all of her cognitive faculties, unlike her husband who was born in 1942. How she met Joe Biden seems to be a mystery. The Biden’s have made the claim they met on a blind date set up by Joe’s brother, Frank. A more realistic claim is that they met at a political fundraiser for Joe Biden in 1974. After that fundraiser, Joe asked his brother Frank to get her number and Joe Biden then called her.
Jill Biden’s former husband, Bill Stevenson, has a different story. Jill Taylor and Bill Stevenson were married in 1970 when Jill was 19. They separated in 1974. Bill Stevenson says that Jill and Joe were having an affair at the time of the separation. Joe Biden was a United States Senator at the time. Biden was elected to the Senate in 1972.
The Bill Stevenson story, based on other information, would seem to be accurate, but please do your own homework. In any case, when Jill married Joe, in 1977, she was 26 and now the wife of a United States Senator.
Jill Biden was a driving force behind Joe’s running for President in 2020, despite it being apparent to any observer that Joe Biden was already in decline. Jill Biden is also a driving force behind Joe Biden running for President in 2024 despite Joe clearly having few if any of his cognitive faculties.
Why would a wife, who claims to love her husband, push him into a position where he is mocked and pitied by all?
Here is what we are learning about the Biden family. They are a crime family who have sold political influence for large sums of money to several different countries. Jill Biden is a powerful lady. Jill Biden has become a wealthy lady. There appear to be many unexplainable situations.
The Biden’s reported $9.5 million in income for fiscal year 2017, almost twice as much as they reported in the prior 19 years combined. It was asserted that this money had come from Biden’s book deal with Flatiron Books.
There is $809,709 of disclosed income in 2017 from book tour and related speaking events. The dismal book sales could not have made up for the difference.
This money flowed to Joe and Jill Biden by way of two S-corporations that they set up shortly after Joe left office in 2017, CelticCapri Corp. (his) and Giacoppa Corp. (hers). Despite claims that their tax returns had been released, the truth was that they only released their individual returns, not the upstream S-corporations’ returns.
We know that Joe Biden is Big Guy Joe of The Biden Crime Family. Could it be that Jill is Big Gal Jill? Could it be that Jill is the brains behind the Biden Crime Family? An honest person would have to surmise that Joe was always intellectually challenged, and even more so over the last ten years. Perhaps Jill is trying to protect Jill and Joe, even if Joe has to be mocked and pitied.
In Russia and in the United States, political opponents of Putin and of Biden are criminals because they are a part of their opposition. In Russia, the number one target is Aleksey Navalny and in the United States it is Donald Trump.
Navalny has opposed the corruption in Russia which is opposing Putin. He exposed financial corruption and voter fraud. He eventually was poisoned on a flight in Russia. His family was able to move him to Germany for medical care. After recovering in Germany, Navalny returned to Russia and was arrested at the Moscow airport. He has been in prison. As his release date nears, he is being tried again and this time he will be sentenced to 30 years to life in prison. As you read this story, you can substitute the name Trump for Navalny. The similarities are frightening.
“Imprisoned Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny went on trial Monday on new charges of extremism that could keep him behind bars for decades.
The trial opened at a maximum-security penal colony in Melekhovo, 250 kilometers (150 miles) east of Moscow, where Navalny, 47, is serving a nine-year sentence for fraud and contempt of court — charges he says are politically motivated. Soon after it began, the judge ruled to close the trial despite Navalny's call to keep it open.
Navalny, who exposed official corruption and organized major anti-Kremlin protests, was arrested in January 2021 upon returning to Moscow after recuperating in Germany from nerve agent poisoning that he blamed on the Kremlin.
Navalny has said the new extremism charges, which he rejected as "absurd," could keep him in prison for another 30 years. He said an investigator told him that he would also face a separate military trial on terrorism charges that could potentially carry a life sentence.
Monday's trial came amid a sweeping Russian crackdown on dissent amid the fighting in Ukraine, which Navalny has harshly criticized.
The Moscow City Court, which opened the hearing at Penal Colony No. 6, didn't allow reporters in the courtroom and they watched the proceedings via video feed from a separate building. Navalny's parents also were denied access to the court and followed the hearing remotely.
Navalny and his lawyers urged the judge to hold an open trial, arguing that authorities are eager to suppress details of the proceedings to cover up the weakness of the case.
"The investigators, the prosecutors and the authorities in general don't want the public to know about the trial," Navalny said.
The new charges relate to the activities of Navalny's anti-corruption foundation and statements by his top associates. His allies said the charges retroactively criminalize all the activities of Navalny's foundation since its creation in 2011.
Navalny has spent months in a tiny one-person cell, also called a "punishment cell," for purported disciplinary violations such as an alleged failure to properly button his prison clothes, properly introduce himself to a guard or to wash his face at a specified time.
As Navalny's trial opened, the Prosecutor General's office declared the Bulgaria-based Agora human rights group to be an "undesirable" organization. It said the group poses a "threat to the constitutional order and national security" by alleging human rights violations and offering legal assistance to members of the opposition movement.
Russian authorities have banned dozens of domestic and foreign nongovernmental organizations on similar grounds.”
There are headlines that are written with the intention of misleading and there are headlines that mislead because the writer did not know. The reason for the misleading headline is not important. Regardless of the reason, you must understand how our constitution works.
This was the headline: Republicans Seek To Strip Election Powers From Democrat North Carolina Governor.
The explanation for the headline was this, “North Carolina Senate Republicans filed legislation Monday to strip Gov. Roy Cooper of power to appoint State Board of Elections members, intensifying a yearslong struggle over state government powers between the GOP-led General Assembly and the Democratic governor.”
The implication is clearly that the nasty, right-wing, extremists Republicans were acting improperly and were violating something.
The United States Constitution in Article 1 Section 4., gives the power to regulate elections to the state legislatures, not the governor, not even the State Board of Election members. Therefore the North Carolina Legislator acted according to the United States Constitution. The role of the governor is not to legislate, but to administer the laws. The governor must adhere to the law passed, even a bill that becomes law because the legislature overrode a veto of that governor.
We are seeing more and more where executive branches are usurping the powers of the legislatures, both state and federal. According to the Constitution, the hard and fast rule is that the legislature branches legislate, and the executive branches administer. Nowhere are executive branches given any authority to legislate. The Supreme Court has upheld this constitutional truth.
A proper headline could have been Republicans Reclaim their Article 1. Section 4., Constitutional Duty from Democrat North Carolina Governor.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.