Tag Archives: freedom

I’m Still Glad Obama Beat Romney: An Open Letter to My Republican Friends

I’ve been a pretty staunch opponent of the actions of the Obama administration since day one. I even tend to get vocal when actions are taken that need to be addressed loudly by the American people, and I have more than once contacted my congressman and Senator to encourage opposition to legislation this administration backed heavily. So it came as a great surprise to many of my conservative friends when I announced that I would rather keep President Obama rather than see Mitt Romney elected. Most called me idealistic, and many said I didn’t know what I was asking for. I was even told that a vote for a 3rd party candidate was a vote for Obama. One of the Tea Party leaders in our area even came out and whined about all the third party voters who made it easier to get Obama re-elected.

The truth is, I knew exactly what I was asking for, and thus far this second term has proved me right. A dangerous candidate, who is recognized as dangerous and is well opposed is much safer than a bad fix who is just as dangerous as the incumbent. This is precisely what we had in the 2012 election cycle. Barak Obama’s agenda is well known and fairly well understood, although most people need to look further up the rabbit hole to see who really runs this country. On key policy issues, Mitt Romney stood for almost all of the same things as the President, except for a couple of issues where he changed his mind just in time to run for President.

This bears serious consequences. Organizations like the 10th Amendment Center have fought this administration tooth and nail at the State and Local level with a great deal of support. There have been court battles, Republicans have been forced to oppose legislation they might support if it they didn’t have to “stop Obama”. Does anyone think a gun grabber like Mitt Romney couldn’t have engineered a bi-partisan plan to restrict magazine capacity or end private sales of firearms? His record indicates he’d try it, but unlike Barak Obama he might have actually succeeded. What’s more, with the national debt spiraling out of control we are headed towards an inflationary collapse. At least under a socialist policy like that of Barak Obama we know what to expect. Based on the USSR we should go down fairly slowly. Get a fake budget hawk like Paul Ryan up there and all bets are off. There is no way to anticipate what will happen in a system where a repair has literally been faked. So yes, I knew what I was getting, and given the choice I’m pretty happy about it.

It’s time we had a serious discussion about the Republican Party. Many members of the liberty movement think they can retake the party, but lets be real. Do we really believe that can happen after the shameful treatment of Dr. Paul’s supporters at the RNC last year and the recent events in Alaska?

We have reached the point where a vote for the Republicans is a vote for statism, just like a vote for the Democrats. There are a handful of high quality candidates fighting it out for control of the party, but like their democratic colleagues there isn’t much chance they’ll win. It’s time for all lovers of liberty, everyone who cares about our Constitution, anyone who wants to see this country move back to its founding principles, to leave the Republican Party to rot.

We have other solid choices. The Constitution Party resonates more clearly with the values of most American’s than either of the two main parties today. Stop propping up a dying party by voting along party lines.

As for myself, with a handful of exceptions for men I personally admire, I will not vote for another Republican again. We’re way passed that point folks, it’s time to actually get serious about who we elect to office because at the end of the day we are morally responsible for their actions.

Advertisements

Essential Liberty

Why there is no other sound basis for government than the preservation of liberty.

I was challenged recently as to why the protection liberty was the only valid basis for government. The person I was having the discussion with, pointed to a couple of other potential possibilities, such as human happiness, as other sound motives for government. The problem is, at the end of the day there is no other lawful purpose for government than the protection of liberty.

As I begin, let me address a few of the more popular alternatives put forward today, after all people don’t typically go around advocating for tyranny.

Democratic Socialism

The argument for democratic socialism, stems from the fact that all resources are shared up “equally” among the people as a whole. The government serves a mediator type role in making decisions about what is necessary for the public good, and uses regulations to push things in the right direction. At a moderate level the United States could be argued to be like this today, and Europe certainly is.

However, democratic or not, all forms of socialism are immoral and in violation of the Divine Law because they are fundamentally built on theft. Any time that the threat of government force is used to take a resource away from those who lawfully obtained and give it to another, including for government projects, it is theft.

At some point we need to begin applying the same standards to government that we do to individuals. The government after all only represents the people. Those who favor this type of government need to realize that every regulation they pass, every dollar they take for the “public good”, all of it is the use of force, threatened or actual. To force a minority to comply.

In addition, democratic socialism is ultimately self defeating for the same reason that communism was. By repressing the minority view in the name of “equality”, innovation is stifled. By taking by force wages from those who lawfully earned them, the incentive to succeed is stifled. The people on the border of being provided for by the wages of others, regardless of how low the initial limits may be, recognize that their poorer neighbors have more disposable income and move to get assistance themselves. This gradually results in a tipping point moment where the producers cannot provide for the rest of the country any more.

So essentially all socialism, democratic or otherwise, is immoral and fails to work.

Human Happiness

As mentioned above it is frequently suggested that human happiness, not liberty should be the basis of government. Typically, like the various forms of socialism, democracy is thrown into the mix to hopefully make everyone happier.

Let me be clear, history and all of the wise men who have gone on before us teach that democracy is far and above the worst form of government imaginable. Any time that the majority believe they have the right to press forward with their will, over and above any rights or wishes of the rest of the nation, oppression and tyranny are sure to follow. Look at the extraordinary violence and failure of the French Revolution, even when wielded against admittedly tyrannical aristocrats, democracy manage to produce worse results than the system it was trying to prevent.

So the question then becomes: Whose happiness? If we are talking about allowing each individual liberty to pursue happiness as they please, then we are just talking about liberty from the perspective of the pursuit of happiness. If, however, we are talking about the collective happiness of society, then we are talking about democracy, and that is indeed a very dangerous road.

The problem comes in this, sooner or later the collective majority will greatly desire something that requires the oppression of a minority to obtain. It doesn’t really matter what it is, but they will decide it is necessary for their happiness. Pretty soon a sense of entitlement will spring up and the minority will come to be viewed as oppressing the majority by withholding the desired resource. Sooner or later the minority will be forced to either “voluntarily” give into the demands of the majority or they will suffer violence and oppression for refusing.

The result, without liberty, is always the happiness of some at the expense of others.

Anarchy

I’m not sure why at the present, but I am seeing more and more calls for an anarchical system. Several of these have even gone so far as to attempt to argue that “anarchy” isn’t actually a system without rules, but one without rulers.

I find this redefinition strange, because it leads one of two directions. Either we are talking about no government, which historically has proven impossible. Or we are talking about a fixed set of laws carried out directly by the people to preserve individual liberty, in which case we aren’t talking about anarch at all but constitutional democracy.

The trouble comes in when we are talking about the first of these 2 choices, which is a more standard definition of anarchy. First of all, there is no historical basis for the idea that such a government could even exist. It has been attempted throughout history, and never with any success. Anarchy exists mostly in chaotic times for very brief periods, it is not possible for it to continue long term. Even the most primitive peoples on earth have some form of government and rule of law.

Second of all, despite its claim at being most free, anarchy is actually extremely oppressive. Scripture and history both teach us that mankind has inherit sin problem, we are not capable of being completely good. In fact, in many cases even 100% Christian societies have exhibited symptoms of this condition. Since man is not inherently good and will naturally tend towards oppressing his neighbors in his own selfish cause without some form of check upon him we have created government.

While I certainly favor limited government, we cannot have no government, because we must have means of protecting the weak from the strong. This can be best done when society as a whole recognizes the rights of each individual and forms a government exclusively to protect them.

Liberty is the only lawful form of government

What was once clear to our forefathers has drifted out of the public knowledge in relatively recent history, a government built on liberty is not simply a “better” form of government, rather it is the only lawful form of government that can exist.

There is, built into the very fabric of creation, a set of laws. Laws which make it clear that each and every man, woman, and child has certain intrinsic rights that they cannot be deprive of. These laws flow from a basic understanding of morality, and can be rooted in the Scripture, particularly the 10 Commandments. Let me give some examples:

Individuals have the right to life. A human being, cannot be lawfully deprived of his right to exist. Thou shalt not murder.

Individuals have a right to maintain control over their own property and to use their goods as they see fit. Thou shalt not steal.

The right of each man to liberty, follows naturally from His being created in the image of God; as well as from the basic laws of morality, without which no society can be organized. This natural law, which dictates the rights of mankind, derives its authority from nature’s God and not from any government or social contract. As William Blackstone noted, the natural law is of equal authority to the law of scripture, though scripture must have a fuller authority since it has been fully revealed by the Holy Spirit.

The issue at stake then, is that no government can be formed in opposition to that natural law. If one does, then it is an unlawful and unjust government. Governments built on other means than this are in direct opposition to the natural order and its Creator and are in error.

Instead, legitimate government, is set up coincide with, and protect people’s rights under, the natural law.

This means, when governments take action to seize people’s liberty, whether by taking away their possessions, taking them as slaves, taking away their right to protect themselves, taking away their religious freedom, etc; they are actually violating a higher law. They are acting outside the bounds of Divinely set authority and those who stand up to them are acting lawfully.

It is high time as a nation, that we reeducated ourselves on these principles, so as to be better able to take a stand on the oppressive tendencies now brewing within our government.

Are Alabama’s Legislators all Tyrants?

I haven’t taken on any local issues here on the blog, but this one is very important to me personally. It probably won’t surprise many of you to find out that I am a big believer in natural and wholistic medicine as is my wife. Here in my home state of Alabama, it is actually illegal for a midwife to assist at a home birth. This is, as I said, pretty personal for me since I have had to make the drive to Tennessee to use a licensed CPM there for the births of my children. There has been a lot said about this issue already, but I think I offer a pretty unique perspective that needs to be addressed.

This is not an issue of appropriate healthcare, this is an issue of liberty versus tyranny. The question that Alabama’s legislators need to be called to task on is this:

Why is it that you believe you have the right to dictate to Alabamians the choices they may or may not make about their own health?

We got all up in arms about Obamacare in this state, and yet here are our own state representatives enforcing their will freely upon the people of this state in the very area of healthcare to affect every single one of us at the moment we come into the world. The government of this state is literally trying to control our lives in the very moments we are being born.

Let me tell you something folks, you may not be particularly pro-midwife, and if you aren’t that is ok; but a government that believes it can tell you what healthcare choices you can and cannot make doesn’t actually believe you have any rights at all. Despite their being Republicans, and despite their bold talk it seems very clear that we have a house full of tyrants in Montgomery who really do think this is their decision to make. They, through their actions, are willing to override the carefully thought out actions of families all over Alabama who recognize that midwifery is a better choice for their families, because they aren’t comfortable with it.

I don’t care one bit whether they are comfortable with my healthcare choices, it isn’t any of their business. The people of Alabama, contrary to the apparent opinion of our legislators are not total idiots. We are fully capable of making our own, informed health care decisions without the help of the special interest groups that run Montgomery.

Next time you decide to call or email your elected officials on this issue I suggest a general change in the way we address the issue. We can talk all day long about how midwifery is a beneficial form of healthcare that is much needed in Alabama, and it very much is; but that argument needs to be made to the people of Alabama at the grass roots level. The focus of our discussion with our legislators needs to be about discovering why they believe they have the authority to make health care decisions for us in the first place.

On this issue I would contend that our legislature is behaving itself as bad or worse than the Federal government in intentionally limiting health care choices that Alabamians clearly want. Until we begin to recognize that our states are just as quick to seize our liberties as the Fed, we will never get our freedom back. The way the state of Alabama has acted on this issue and a few others, if the old south “rises again”, I’ll move.

Dare to defend your rights! Take action on this issue while you still have the right to do so!

Thank You Senator Paul

I won’t go on about this, but I would like to publicly express my appreciation for the actions of Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky yesterday who boldly seized the senate floor in a filibuster for nearly 13 hours to call American attention to the DOJ’s claim that it now has legal authority to use drones to kill American citizens.

Senator Paul’s actions called attention to the continued staggering by our Federal government towards total tyranny. Most American continue to be deliberately ignorant of the dangerous growth of our Federal government and of the now rather long list of prohibited behaviors. If you want to really know how bad it is, you have to try to do things differently than your neighbors, for more detail on this read my post Freedom Isn’t Free and Neither Are You

We need more men like Senator Paul who will continue to be vocal when the Federal government continues to seize more and more of our liberty.

Happy Birthday George Washington!

While American’s officially celebrate Washington’s Birthday on “Presidents Day”, today marks his actual birthday on the Gregorian Calendar. There is perhaps no man Americans needs to know more about today than Washington. For several years now the Founding Fathers, and Washington in particular have been under constant attack from certain corners with all kinds of wild accusations. One of the principle charges against Washington is that he was pompous and had an insatiable desire for wealth, power, and influence. As one who primarily gets his American history from source documents, I find these lies quite amusing. Anyone who met Washington personally, even those most critical of some of his policies such as the Anti-Federalists, spoke of his great humility and patriotism. From these accounts it becomes quite clear that Washington didn’t want to be commander of the Army during the Revolution or the nation’s first president. He took these jobs out of duty to protect the country through hard times.

I think the difficulty we have with Washington, the difficulty that must be overcome if we ever intend for this nation to return to its founding principles, is that he is such a giant our cynical modern minds have trouble grasping him. George Washington rose up from a relatively humble life to become one of the nations largest landholders, even by age 16 he had been appointed the county surveyor and was gaining influence among several prominent citizens of Virginia. His ultimate success both as a general and a president stemmed from his patience and willingness to put the good of the country ahead of his personal honor. General Washington faced constant accusations that he was a failure because he recognized that his army could not afford a direct confrontation with the British through much of the first part of the war. He waited patiently and struck only when opportunities for victory presented themselves, such as the Christmas Day attack on the Hessians. As President both of the Constitutional convention and these United States it was much the same. George Washington showed constant restraint, patience, and fairness in his dealings with members of fiercely divided parties. As a nation founded on checks and balances developed from multiple viewpoints, only the guidance of a perfectly honest man, driven only by love of his country could have carried us through such strenuous times. In addition to all of this, Washington (in contrast I might add to our modern political class) refused to give into the pomp of political office. In fact, he was terrified that the President might gain celebrity status and thus degenerate into a more monarchical role. So, as President, Washington refused to live excessively and even tried (though unsuccessfully) to slip out of town unnoticed when he retired.

One of the greatest troubles facing out nation today is compromise. Everyone seems to feel compelled to vote for the lesser of two evils so they can “win”. Trouble is, that guarantees we lose. It is time those who claim love for the Constitution stopped looking for the next Ronald Reagan and started looking for the next George Washington.

Freedom Isn’t Free, And Neither Are You

A brief look at the subtle seizure of American liberty

As a general rule, I avoid talking about what is going wrong without talking about what to do about it. In this case though, the awareness alone is part of the “what to do”. It is a tragic day when your nation gradually slides into tyranny and most of her citizens stand by and cheer, never recognizing the imminent danger. Many American’s delusionaly believe that they live in a free nation, they recognize that we were founded as the most liberty oriented nation on earth and fail to recognize the changes that have taken place.

In order for any action to take place, people have to realize that action is necessary. For this reason I will now summarize some of the most grievous offenses committed against American liberty.

Permits and Licenses

If you have to have a permit or license to do something, then the government does not recognize your right to do it. Rather they believe that it is sometimes necessary that you engage in certain activities and give you special permission to do so, provided that you do it the way that they want you to. So then for specific examples:

You cannot do as you please with your own property. Building codes, supposedly put in place for our “protection” actually serve to keep you from using your own property as you see fit. If you don’t believe me, try getting permission to put non-traditional buildings on your property.

You cannot bear arms. While there has been a great deal of emphasis recently on the right to keep arms, as guaranteed by the second amendment, most American’s fail to realize that except in a handful of states their right to bear arms has been completely infringed. If you have to obtain a permit to possess a firearm for your defense in public, then you have no right to do so and are simply being allowed to do so by the governments good graces. Only the “Constitutional Carry” states actually recognize that your right to bear arms is self possessed and cannot be infringed.

You cannot drive. Despite the governments constant reminders that you own the highways, you are not allowed to drive unless the government gives you approval to do so.

This list can go on, just look at the plethora of licenses required to do just about anything in this country anymore, and as you look remember that each one represents a right the government believe you don’t have.

Regulations

This is another sneaky way that liberties have been seized from the American people. The creative use of regulation has forced us down certain pathways, the only alternative to which is to commit civil disobedience.

Zoning laws might be the most dangerous laws we have as a nation today. Supposedly these laws are put in place to keep big corporations from moving in and ruining the neighborhood, of course this doesn’t matter because when they want to move in the government just seizes the whole neighborhood and gives it to them to “improve the local economy”. What zoning laws actually do is make sure that for, example, I cannot grow to much of my own food on my own property. This is done by limiting whether or not I can have chickens and how many, or in some recent cases by refusing to allow the presence of gardens in the front yard. These laws also prevent me from “setting up a retail center” on my property, which is generally interpreted to go so far as a child’s lemonade stand.

Speaking of food, regulations are also destroying our local farmers. When congress passes a “food safety bill” that requires the purchase of forty thousand dollars worth of equipment, a large scale producer simply adds this minor cost in to each of the millions of items it produces. A local producer, however, can choose to either go out of business (you can’t sell fresh eggs for $100 a piece after all) or refuse to comply with regulations. The government also tells farmers what they can and can’t sell, raw milk being the most well known example today.

In one case I recently read about, a man has had his free speech regulated away. All because he is teaching nutritionally choices and options that the local medical community is unhappy about. So, rather than having a logical discussion and disproving what he had to say, they chose to use creative regulations to prevent anyone who isn’t a licensed nutritionist from giving health advice.

The essence of the regulations issue, is that they consistently force market forces in a certain directions. If you want to know why we have such expensive health care costs, look at the regulations. No one with any real business since wants to get involved in healthcare, because it is to difficult to create a niche and be entrepreneurial. The same can be said for hundreds of other industries, regulations are literally controlling which companies succeed and which ones fail. As you might expect, of course, the government only grants its favor to large business that spend large amounts of money on campaign contributors.

Summing Up

These are just a handful of areas that are currently under assault right in front of the American people, and yet most people obstinately believe that they still live in a free nation. The facts speak otherwise.

The statement that freedom isn’t free is quite true, we must pay dearly to keep our liberties. In many cases this means we have to trade our security for liberty. I am convinced that many people really want the government telling them what food is safe, which doctor to use, and who can and can’t be trusted to own a firearm. The trouble is, government will always expand every single power the people give to it and ultimately full scale tyranny will result.

Why I’m Part of the Constitution Party

In the wake of the mistreatment of Ron Paul’s supporters at the Republican National Convention last year, for more info see video; many libertarian leaning voters have been looking not only for a candidate (many voted for Libertarian Gary Johnson) but for a party. From my perspective the results of last years primaries were clear, the Republicans are to far gone for there to be any kind of liberty movement within the party. The occasional congressman or senator may slip through, but there isn’t going to be any change of the party. Any change that takes place will simply be squashed by the higher ups in the party. That said, while I did proudly vote for Ron Paul in my state’s primary, I have been working towards a different solution, and have recently taken a more active role in the Constitution Party here in my home state.

For my part this has been a bit of a journey, a journey that I think will also help guide a discussion of why I believe the Constitution Party to be the best place to entrust your vote. It began for me in 2008, I considered the differences between John McCain and Barak Obama to be nominal at best and was looking for a candidate who represented my values. I found one in Constitution Party Candidate, Chuck Baldwin. I began following Chuck’s column and continued to become more active in working towards restoring our nation to its original form as a constitutional republic.

2010 was a tipping point, I feel very strongly that it is going to be primarily state level change that brings our nation back to where it ought to be. I was very interested in State Sovereignty and the nullification process as the only way we could retake our liberty. For this reason I felt it was of paramount importance that we have good state governments. I was pretty passionate during the primaries, which are in my opinion the only good opportunity to choose a good candidate from one of the 2 major parties, and strongly advocated for several qualified candidates among my friends, neighbors, and colleagues. With the rise of the so called “Tea Party” movement, there were also a handful of decent candidates running nationwide that I kept an eye. In the end I was pretty disappointed, the candidates who ended up on the ballot in my state were quite poor, and nationwide most of the key races I followed went badly. In addition, many of the supposedly constitution loving “Tea Party” candidates have since proved to be nothing more than nasty big government Republicans rebranded.

It was then that I was so disgusted that I decided to do something about it. I had never been a Republican, but I wanted to be part of the change. So I signed up to participate with our local Constitution Party. I wasn’t more involved up until this point for a variety of family reasons, but 2012 like 2010 pushed me even further. I was struggling somewhat in choosing between Constitution Party candidate Virgil Goode, and libertarian Gary Johnson. The Free & Equal debates went poorly for Mr. Goode, and I felt a little more aligned with Mr. Johnson except on a couple of very key issues. That’s when I saw this video of the Baldwin-Nader debate from 2008. Pastor Baldwin laid out the essence of the Constitution Party platform so articulately that I knew I could do something I had never done before. I could vote for a man because I trusted his party.

In the last few weeks I have been moving towards a more active role, working on bringing my membership up to date and actually getting involved with my local party, so long as they’ll have me I’ll keep getting more involved as I’m able. Here in short are the reasons I believe the Constitution Party embodies the type of change I spelled out in No Magic Bullets:
*The Constitution Party is primarily active at the state level working to bring liberty minded candidates onto the ballot in state and local elections. This has several key consequences:
*In local elections, people are more important than money. This means their candidates
actually have a chance of winning, as opposed to Libertarian party candidates who at least in
my area are a once every 4 years flash in the pan.
*This keeps liberty candidates, and the notion of voting third party before the public eye.
Something that can’t be done in national elections because the debates are closed.
*Should it be unusually successful in winning state elections, this will allow for movement on
the State Sovereignty and nullification movements at previously unseen levels.
*The values of the Constitution Party, while diverse, represent liberty with faith. As opposed to some of the more anarchistic factions of the libertarian movement that are opposed to rule of law as a whole.
*The Constitution Party is consistent. I have always said that a libertarian (person not party member) is nothing more than a Republican or Democrat who has taken his ideals to their logical conclusions. The Constitution Party rejects the phony left-right schizophrenia that embraces certain liberties and not others, and instead advocates for a consistent, Constitutional, and pro-liberty approach.

I could go further, but I will let this list suffice at this time. Let me just sum it up to say, that if you love the liberty movement but are tired of trying to reform the unreformable, if like our nations founders you want faith with your liberty, then the Constitution Party is for you. For more details on Constitution Party values, watch the Baldwin-Nader debate or go here.