You people just don’t get it do you? You just don’t understand a thing when it comes to what President Obama, his Administration, and Congress are trying to accomplish for America do you? President Obama & Company are working hard to improve the economy. You can’t see that?

The President gave a short six minute speech in the Rose Garden yesterday addressing the economy.  You can watch it here. I’ve been reading a number of responses to Obama’s speech and there’s a common theme that the President just doesn’t get it. That he’s tone deaf; he’s lost touch with America.  Well, let’s just dive a little deeper into his speech:

What we did know was that it took nearly a decade to dig the hole that we’re in, and that it would take longer than any of us would like to climb our way out. President Obama August 30th, 2010 Rose Garden

Actually Mr. President it took over three decades to dig the hole that we’re in: “The True Origins of This Financial Crisis”. You and others were part of the destruction. You and the Progressives want us to forget that. You want us to forget that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were left out of your “financial reform” bill.

Every single day, I’m pushing this economy forward, repairing the damage that’s been done to the middle class over the past decade and promoting the growth we need to get our people back to work. President Obama August 30th, 2010 Rose Garden

Wait,  you’re working every single day on pushing the economy forward Mr. President? Wait, silly me, the proof is in the “Summer of Recovery”. BTW Mr. President, good job getting the “repairing damage over the past decade” in there again too.

The President then devotes the rest of his speech to the “Small Business Jobs Bill” which he blames Republicans for blocking. Ahh yes Mr President that “Small Business Jobs Bill“. I thought you said no more bailouts for banks?

The President also states:

This bill is fully paid for. It will not add to the deficit. President Obama August 30th, 2010 Rose Garden

So it’s free Mr. President? You mean we don’t have to worry at all about this bill’s cost? Actually the President doesn’t want the American taxpayers to understand the phrase above. It means – America we are making you pay for it so it’s paid for! Isn’t that cool how that works?!!

President Obama then proceeds to close the deal:

It’s going to take a full-scale effort, a full-scale attack that not only helps in the short term but builds a firmer foundation that makes our nation stronger for the long haul. President Obama August 30th, 2010 Rose Garden

So let me understand this Mr. President – You’re talking in the future tense here. Hmmm, I think I’ve heard this before though. Oh yeah, I forgot…again.

Mr President, just an FYI: You have to create 1.75 MILLION jobs each month for the next 4 months to keep your promise.

In regards to your concern about making “our nation stronger for the long haul”, we can see that your fully focused and working “every single day pushing this economy forward”:

Now you might have thought I was calling President Obama a dumb-ass in the title and throughout the post in one form or another. Nothing could be further from the truth.  It was actually President Obama who called all of you a dumb-ass.

I mean, how many times does the guy have to tell you what he told you before he was even elected?

“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.” Frederic Bastiat

Progressives and their ilk oft repeat the phrase: “Separate. but equal”.  They do so in their efforts to divide and control individuals. They use “Separate, but equal” to advance the parasitic nature of Progressivism.  They never, EVER, want anyone to realize that we are all Separate AND Equal.

Please consider:

• There are 6 billion human beings on the planet (separate) that all have the exact same 64 base DNA pairs (and equal).
• There are approximately 300 million citizens (separate) in America (and equal).
• Each person (separate) is created equally (and equal).
• Each person (separate) is granted unalienable rights by Our Creator (and equal).
• Each person (separate) has free will (and equal).

Funny what happens when you apply critical thinking.

I’m looking forward to others posting their examples of Separate and Equal. Let’s see how many Progressives will post here demonstrating their lack of critical thinking.

Enthusiasm is the mother of effort, and without it nothing great was ever achieved.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

I am enthusiastic about America and Life! “But Pete, how can you be enthusiastic given the current negative conditions?”, you ask. I am enthusiastic about America because of the positive affirmations and confirmations that negative conditions produce.

Please consider the following:

• The incontrovertible proof that the only thing progressive about Progressivism is destruction.
• There are decades of factual documentation which show Big Government does NOT work.

Now based upon just those two factual statements we can now affirm the following:

• The restoration of America can be accomplished using the original intent of just two documents: The Declaration of Independence (the promise) and The U.S. Constitution (the fulfillment)
• The debate about Progressivism is over. The permanent eradication of Progressivism has just begun.
• Life, Liberty, & the individual Pursuit of Happiness can only be achieved through limited government.

Now think about what I just laid out above for a moment. You feel that? If you did then you just felt the enthusiasm that I have.  It’s the realization that one no longer needs to waste their time debating with proponents of Big Government and Progressivism.  It’s the understanding that each one of us can now focus on restoring America in the correct way rather than the whims of a minority (progressives).

It’s the knowing of the Laws of Nature. They are everlasting and are embedded within each one of us and live everlastingly without each one of us.

The Energy of Enthusiasm is contagious. The Laws of Nature are all powerful. The individual has but to take action to pass both down to the next generation thus leaving the world better off then when we had entered it.

1. Do you believe in the individual unalienable rights including Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness through limited government as clearly enumerated in the Constitution? (Note: If your Representative or Senator does not answer with a simple yes then there is no need to ask any other questions. Proceed 2 vote them out immediately) U.S. Constitution
2. Will you repeal ObamaCare that has been proven to fail and does nothing to reform health care? RomneyCare, Canadian HC System, Britain’s NHS
3. Will you repeal the Dodd/Frank “Financial Regulation Law” and reinstate Glass-Steagall that worked for 50 years? (Hint – You only need 1 page to do this) Glass-Steagall
4. Why did you allow Congress to pass no budget? Where’s the Budget?
5. What is your plan to reduce the deficit? A Road Map for America’s Future

This should be more than enough questions to ask your Representative or Senator err… I mean the children.

You also might want to remind Congress about what type of government we have in America as well:

Who you are speaks so loudly I can’t hear what you’re saying. Ralph Waldo Emerson

Progressives rely on the ability of people to ignore what has actually occurred so that they can promote Progressivism as progress.  It’s a movement of controlling the individual for the benefit of the few. It’s destruction discriminates against no party, race, or religion.  It seeks a utopia that is never based on Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness through limited government. It violates every unalienable right given to every human being on this planet by our Creator.

This is not up for debate. It has been proven over and over again.

We were told that we need the government to step in and provide health care for all Americans when ObamaCare was proposed.  Indeed we were told by the Speaker of the House:

• We have proof in our own country: RomneyCare (As I said, Progressivism does not discriminate between parties.)
• The architect of the Canadian Single Payer System admits it is a failure.
• Britain’s NHS is a complete failure.
• Medicare is bankrupt with $76 Trillion in unfunded liabilities. That’s 6 times the total GDP of the U.S.

Progressives make it a point to claim that they are for the children and that their collective salvation for our youth in this country is education.  In reality, Progressives are concerned with ideology and not education:

• It takes a village.
• The irrefutable case for the abolishment of the Department of Education.
• Head Start is an Epic Fail.

Progressives believe that spending more than you ever take in works. Note to Progressivism: Keynesian Economics fails every time.

• Japan’s gross debt-to-GDP ratio is second only to Zimbabwe, at almost 200 percent.
• Regardless of party affiliation Congress has always increased spending.
• Robbing Jimmy to pay John is not called a surplus.
• California, thy path is bankruptcy.
• The True Origins of This Financial Crisis.

The proven examples of the failure of Progressivism are abundant beyond this post. Progressivism is the destructive cancer that it has always been around the world.  The ‘hope’ of Progressivism is clothed in the willful ignorance of what actually has occurred.  I have no room for the destruction that Progressivism wreaks. I seek it’s eradication across the world. To do anything different would be to deny my children and future generations the freedom that is already theirs. As an American, it is my duty to do so.

Progressives may choose to live in America but they have zero rights to destroy this great country as they have been doing for decades within both parties. Americans have been apathetic and allowed this cancer to fester and grow and have no one to blame but themselves.

The last time I checked, America was not founded on social justice or redistribution of wealth. It was not founded based on race, religion, or any other divisive label.  It was founded on the unalienable rights that Nature’s God and Nature’s Laws have given us.

America was founded on the basis that all were created equal.  That is all human beings have the equal individual opportunity to pursue Life, Liberty and Happiness through limited government.  That is the foundation of freedom. Progressivism and it’s followers seek to destroy it willfully.

I’ve closed the comments for this post as I don’t need any delusional rantings from Progressives because as we can see so clearly – Progressivism and it’s followers are stuck on stupid.

Dear Fellow Citizens,

You are the only ones who can restore America.  In order to do so you must come to the realization that the current state of the greatest country on the face of the planet is your fault.  It’s no one else’s but yours. You’ve sat by and voted people in, from both parties, that have absolutely no interest in Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness thru Limited Government.  You didn’t take the time to individually vet each person you voted for. You let Congress increase spending every year since the mid 1960s.  You gave up. This is not my opinion. This is fact.

One of the greatest Presidents in our history reminds you:

“Duty is not collective; it is personal” Calvin Coolidge

Still don’t think you have a personal responsibility for the current state of America? Allow me:

• U.S. Debt – $13 Trillion, Debt per citizen – $42,000
• U.S. Unfunded Liabilities – $109 Trillion, Liability per citizen $353,000
• Gross Debt to GDP ratio – 91.1%

Now who controls the purse strings of the Government? Congress. So who voted the members of Congress in? You. As I said, this is not opinion, this is fact. It’s on you Americans and no one else.

Before we move on let’s make this abundantly clear – There is no hyphen in America. America is called the melting pot of the world for a reason. When you put things in a melting pot they assimilate and come together. So you’re American. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Now let’s look at what you let in to bring our great country to it’s current state:

Progressivism. Let me be perfectly clear. Progressivism is party agnostic. It doesn’t matter what party you’re from or what color your skin is or what religion you are.

Progressivism is the most parasitic destructive man made force on the face of this planet.  It and it’s proponents will do anything to ensure that this cancer grows at the maximum rate. It’s insidious as it grows and feeds on it’s hosts without fanfare. It goes against everything in our great Constitution and violates every unalienable right granted to us by our Creator.  This is not my opinion, it is fact:

• Social Security, Medicare, & Medicaid are bankrupt. (See U.S. Unfunded liabilities above)
• Since the $800+ Billion Stimulus package was passed 3 million people have lost their jobs. 8 million total since this recession started.
• RomneyCare in Massachusetts is a complete failure.
• California and Illinois are bankrupt.
• Spending more than you ever take in has never worked. Debt to GDP for: Japan – 202%, Greece – 124%, Italy – 120%, U.S. – 91% and Germany – 80%.

I could go on as Progressivism has infected every city, state, municipality, province, region, and country in the world but you get the picture.

Now, stop reading for a moment and physically go look at your children and/or grandchildren. You are looking at the future generations of America who literally have no future because of your actions. Think about that for a moment:

You have screwed your very own flesh and blood out of a future that they deserve through your personal inaction and irresponsibility.

This is not my opinion, this is cold, hard, in-your-face, facts.

The time for all Americans to come together is now. It’s time for each one of us to rise up and actively engage in ensuring that this country is restored. Our political class in D.C. are nothing more than a bunch of self serving, arrogant, imbeciles who couldn’t govern their way out of a toilet.

There’s a very simple test in finding out if your representative or senator or candidate is the right person to carry out the instructions of the Constitution. You merely have to ask two questions and they both require answering yes or no:

• Are you for Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness through limited government?
• Will you faithfully execute your duties according to the original intent of the Constitution?

That’s it. Simple yes or no answers. If your Congressmen/women or candidate can’t answer those questions then you know not to vote for them. If they stutter or start giving long answers it’s a no vote.  Regardless of party. It’s a no brainer.

Now, to all the Progressives out there:

I’m not debating this with you. I don’t need to. Your actions scream so loud I can’t hear the lies and bullshit that you spread.  The game is up for you. You, who call yourself “Progressives”, are no longer needed in this country or anywhere in the world for that matter. Is that harsh? No, because you’re out to destroy America. You will fail just like you’ve always failed every single time. This is not my opinion. It is a matter of fact.

Citizens of America this is your country, haven’t you had enough of Progressivism or will you let it infect your children and host on them for their entire lives?

I’ll close with this reminder:

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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — 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 effect their Safety and Happiness.

God Bless America!

Some principles are so constant and so obvious that we do not need to change them, but we need rather to observe them. Calvin Coolidge

Happy 4th of July to everyone of my fellow Americans. Today we come together as Americans to celebrate our Independence, our Freedom, our unalienable rights granted to us by our Creator. Calvin Coolidge, our 30th President, gave a speech on July 5th, 1926 that shows the inspiration of the Greatest Nation on Earth. Happy Birthday America and God Bless each and every American.

Here, in it’s entirety is “The Inspiration of the Declaration of Independence” by Calvin Coolidge:

We meet to celebrate the birthday of America. The coming of a new life always excites our interest. Although we know in the case of the individual that it has been an infinite repetition reaching back beyond our vision, that only makes it the more wonderful. But how our interest and wonder increase when we behold the miracle of the birth of a new nation. It is to pay our tribute of reverence and respect to those who participated in such a mighty event that we annually observe the fourth day of July. Whatever may have been the impression created by the news which went out from this city on that summer day in 1776, there can be no doubt as to the estimate which is now placed upon it. At the end of 150 years the four corners of the earth unite in coming to Philadelphia as to a holy shrine in grateful acknowledgment of a service so great, which a few inspired men here rendered to humanity, that it is still the preeminent support of free government throughout the world.

Although a century and a half measured in comparison with the length of human
experience is but a short time, yet measured in the life of governments and nations it ranks as a very respectable period. Certainly enough time has elapsed to demonstrate with a great deal of thoroughness the value of our institutions and their dependability as rules for the regulation of human conduct and the advancement of civilization. They have been in existence long enough to become very well seasoned. They have met, and met successfully, the test of experience.

It is not so much then for the purpose of undertaking to proclaim new theories and principles that this annual celebration is maintained, but rather to reaffirm and reestablish those old theories and principles which time and the unerring logic of events have demonstrated to be sound. Amid all the clash of conflicting interests, amid all the welter of partisan politics, every American can turn for solace and consolation to the Declaration of independence and the Constitution of the United States with the assurance and confidence that those two great charters of freedom and justice remain firm and unshaken. Whatever perils appear, whatever dangers threaten, the Nation remains secure in the knowledge that the ultimate application of the law of the land will provide an adequate defense and protection.

It is little wonder that people at home and abroad consider Independence Hall as hallowed ground and revere the Liberty Bell as a sacred relic. That pile of bricks and mortar, that mass of metal, might appear to the uninstructed as only the outgrown meeting place and the shattered bell of a former time, useless now because of more modern conveniences, but to those who know they have become consecrated by the use which men have made of them. They have long been identified with a great cause. They are the framework of a spiritual event. The world looks upon them, because of their associations of one hundred and fifty years ago, as it looks upon the Holy Land because of what took place there nineteen hundred years ago. Through use for a righteous purpose they have become sanctified.

It is not here necessary to examine in detail the causes which led to the American Revolution. In their immediate occasion they were largely economic. The colonists objected to the navigation laws which interfered with their trade, they denied the power of Parliament to impose taxes which they were obliged to pay, and they therefore resisted the royal governors and the royal forces which were sent to secure obedience to these laws. But the conviction is inescapable that a new civilization had come, a new spirit had arisen on this side of the Atlantic more advanced and more developed in its regard for the rights of the individual than that which characterized the Old World. Life in a new and open country had aspirations which could not be realized in any subordinate position. A separate establishment was ultimately inevitable. It had been decreed by the very laws of human nature. Man everywhere has an unconquerable desire to be the master of his own destiny.

We are obliged to conclude that the Declaration of Independence represented the movement of a people. It was not, of course, a movement from the top. Revolutions do not come from that direction. It was not without the support of many of the most respectable people in the Colonies, who were entitled to all the consideration that is given to breeding, education, and possessions. It had the support of another element of great significance and importance to which I shall later refer. But the preponderance of all those who occupied a position which took on the aspect of aristocracy did not approve of the Revolution and held toward it an attitude either of neutrality or open hostility. It was in no sense a rising of the oppressed and downtrodden. It brought no scum to the surface, for the reason that colonial society had developed no scum. The great body of the people were accustomed to privations, but they were free from depravity. If they had poverty, it was not of the hopeless kind that afflicts great cities, but the inspiring kind that marks the spirit of the pioneer. The American Revolution represented the informed and mature convictions of a great mass of independent, liberty-loving, God-fearing people who knew their rights, and possessed the courage to dare to maintain them. The Continental Congress was not only composed of great men, but it represented a great people. While its members did not fail to exercise a remarkable leadership, they were equally observant of their representative capacity. They were industrious in encouraging their constituents to instruct them to support independence. But until such instructions were given they were inclined to withhold action.

While North Carolina has the honor of first authorizing its delegates to concur with other Colonies in declaring independence, it was quickly followed by South Carolina and Georgia, which also gave general instructions broad enough to include such action. But the first instructions which unconditionally directed its delegates to declare for independence came from the great Commonwealth of Virginia. These were immediately followed by Rhode Island and Massachusetts, while the other Colonies, with the exception of New York, soon adopted a like course.

This obedience of the delegates to the wishes of their constituents, which in some cases caused them to modify their previous positions, is a matter of great significance. It reveals an orderly process of government in the first place; but more than that, it demonstrates that the Declaration of Independence was the result of the seasoned and deliberate thought of the dominant portion of the people of the Colonies. Adopted after long discussion and as the result of the duly authorized expression of the preponderance of public opinion, it did not partake of dark intrigue or hidden conspiracy. It was well advised. It had about it nothing of the lawless and disordered nature of a riotous insurrection. It was maintained on a plane which rises above the ordinary conception of rebellion. It was in no sense a radical movement but took on the dignity of a resistance to illegal usurpations. It was conservative and represented the action of the colonists to maintain their constitutional rights which from time immemorial had been guaranteed to them under the law of the land.

When we come to examine the action of the Continental Congress in adopting the Declaration of Independence in the light of what was set out in that great document and in the light of succeeding events, we can not escape the conclusion that it had a much broader and deeper significance than a mere secession of territory and the establishment of a new nation. Events of that nature have been taking place since the dawn of history. One empire after another has arisen, only to crumble away as its constituent parts separated from each other and set up independent governments of their own. Such actions long ago became commonplace. They have occurred too often to hold the attention of the world and command the admiration and reverence of humanity. There is something beyond the establishment of a new nation, great as that event would be, in the Declaration of Independence which has ever since caused it to be regarded as one of the great charters that not only was to liberate America but was everywhere to ennoble humanity.

It was not because it was proposed to establish a new nation, but because it was proposed to establish a nation on new principles, that July 4, 1776, has come to be regarded as one of the greatest days in history. Great ideas do not burst upon the world unannounced. They are reached by a gradual development over a length of time usually proportionate to their importance. This is especially true of the principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence. Three very definite propositions were set out in its preamble regarding the nature of mankind and therefore of government. These were the doctrine that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, and that therefore the source of the just powers of government must be derived from the consent of the governed.

If no one is to be accounted as born into a superior station, if there is to be no ruling class, and if all possess rights which can neither be bartered away nor taken from them by any earthly power, it follows as a matter of course that the practical authority of the Government has to rest on the consent of the governed. While these principles were not altogether new in political action, and were very far from new in political speculation, they had never been assembled before and declared in such a combination. But remarkable as this may be, it is not the chief distinction of the Declaration of Independence. The importance of political speculation is not to be under-estimated, as I shall presently disclose. Until the idea is developed and the plan made there can be no action.

It was the fact that our Declaration of Independence containing these immortal truths was the political action of a duly authorized and constituted representative public body in its sovereign capacity, supported by the force of general opinion and by the armies of Washington already in the field, which makes it the most important civil document in the world. It was not only the principles declared, but the fact that therewith a new nation was born which was to be founded upon those principles and which from that time forth in its development has actually maintained those principles, that makes this pronouncement an incomparable event in the history of government. It was an assertion that a people had arisen determined to make every necessary sacrifice for the support of these truths and by their practical application bring the War of Independence to a successful conclusion and adopt the Constitution of the United States with all that it has meant to civilization.

The idea that the people have a right to choose their own rulers was not new in political history. It was the foundation of every popular attempt to depose an undesirable king. This right was set out with a good deal of detail by the Dutch when as early as July 26, 1581, they declared their independence of Philip of Spain. In their long struggle with the Stuarts the British people asserted the same principles, which finally culminated in the Bill of Rights deposing the last of that house and placing William and Mary on the throne. In each of these cases sovereignty through divine right was displaced by sovereignty through the consent of the people. Running through the same documents, though expressed in different terms, is the clear inference of inalienable rights. But we should search these charters in vain for an assertion of the doctrine of equality. This principle had not before appeared as an official political declaration of any nation. It was profoundly revolutionary. It is one of the corner stones of American institutions.

But if these truths to which the declaration refers have not before been adopted in their combined entirety by national authority, it is a fact that they had been long pondered and often expressed in political speculation. It is generally assumed that French thought had some effect upon our public mind during Revolutionary days. This may have been true. But the principles of our declaration had been under discussion in the Colonies for nearly two generations before the advent of the French political philosophy that characterized the middle of the eighteenth century. In fact, they come from an earlier date. A very positive echo of what the Dutch had done in 1581, and what the English were preparing to do, appears in the assertion of the Rev. Thomas Hooker of Connecticut as early as 1638, when he said in a sermon before the General Court that:

The foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people. The choice of public magistrates belongs unto the people by God’s own allowance.

This doctrine found wide acceptance among the nonconformist clergy who later made up the Congregational Church. The great apostle of this movement was the Rev. John Wise, of Massachusetts. He was one of the leaders of the revolt against the royal governor Andros in 1687, for which he suffered imprisonment. He was a liberal in ecclesiastical controversies. He appears to have been familiar with the writings of the political scientist, Samuel Pufendorf, who was born in Saxony in 1632. Wise published a treatise, entitled “The Church’s Quarrel Espoused,” in 1710 which was amplified in another publication in 1717. In it he dealt with the principles of civil government. His works were reprinted in 1772 and have been declared to have been nothing less than a textbook of liberty for our Revolutionary fathers.

While the written word was the foundation, it is apparent that the spoken word was the vehicle for convincing the people. This came with great force and wide range from the successors of Hooker and Wise, It was carried on with a missionary spirit which did not fail to reach the Scotch Irish of North Carolina, showing its influence by significantly making that Colony the first to give instructions to its delegates looking to independence. This preaching reached the neighborhood of Thomas Jefferson, who acknowledged that his “best ideas of democracy” had been secured at church meetings.

That these ideas were prevalent in Virginia is further revealed by the Declaration of Rights, which was prepared by George Mason and presented to the general assembly on May 27, 1776. This document asserted popular sovereignty and inherent natural rights, but confined the doctrine of equality to the assertion that “All men are created equally free and independent”. It can scarcely be imagined that Jefferson was unacquainted with what had been done in his own Commonwealth of Virginia when he took up the task of drafting the Declaration of Independence. But these thoughts can very largely be traced back to what John Wise was writing in 1710. He said, “Every man must be acknowledged equal to every man”. Again, “The end of all good government is to cultivate humanity and promote the happiness of all and the good of every man in all his rights, his life, liberty, estate, honor, and so forth . . . .” And again, “For as they have a power every man in his natural state, so upon combination they can and do bequeath this power to others and settle it according as their united discretion shall determine”. And still again, “Democracy is Christ’s government in church and state”. Here was the doctrine of equality, popular sovereignty, and the substance of the theory of inalienable rights clearly asserted by Wise at the opening of the eighteenth century, just as we have the principle of the consent of the governed stated by Hooker as early as 1638.

When we take all these circumstances into consideration, it is but natural that the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence should open with a reference to Nature’s God and should close in the final paragraphs with an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world and an assertion of a firm reliance on Divine Providence. Coming from these sources, having as it did this background, it is no wonder that Samuel Adams could say “The people seem to recognize this resolution as though it were a decree promulgated from heaven.”

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. The profound philosophy which Jonathan Edwards applied to theology, the popular preaching of George Whitefield, had aroused the thought and stirred the people of the Colonies in preparation for this great event. No doubt the speculations which had been going on in England, and especially on the Continent, lent their influence to the general sentiment of the times. Of course, the world is always influenced by all the experience and all the thought of the past. But when we come to a contemplation of the immediate conception of the principles of human relationship which went into the Declaration of Independence we are not required to extend our search beyond our own shores. 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. They preached equality because they believed in the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. They justified freedom by the text that we are all created in the divine image, all partakers of the divine spirit.

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. This was their theory of democracy. In those days such doctrines would scarcely have been permitted to flourish and spread in any other country. This was the purpose which the fathers cherished. In order that they might have freedom to express these thoughts and opportunity to put them into action, whole congregations with their pastors had migrated to the colonies. These great truths were in the air that our people breathed. Whatever else we may say of it, the Declaration of Independence was profoundly American.

If this apprehension of the facts be correct, and the documentary evidence would appear to verify it, then certain conclusions are bound to follow. A spring will cease to flow if its source be dried up; a tree will wither if its roots be destroyed. In its main features the Declaration of Independence is a great spiritual document. It is a declaration not of material but of spiritual conceptions. Equality, liberty, popular sovereignty, the rights of man these are not elements which we can see and touch. They are ideals. They have their source and their roots in the religious convictions. They belong to the unseen world. Unless the faith of the American people in these religious convictions is to endure, the principles of our Declaration will perish. We can not continue to enjoy the result if we neglect and abandon the cause.

We are too prone to overlook another conclusion. Governments do not make ideals, but ideals make governments. This is both historically and logically true. Of course the government can help to sustain ideals and can create institutions through which they can be the better observed, but their source by their very nature is in the people. The people have to bear their own responsibilities. There is no method by which that burden can be shifted to the government. It is not the enactment, but the observance of laws, that creates the character of a nation.

About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.

In the development of its institutions America can fairly claim that it has remained true to the principles which were declared 150 years ago. In all the essentials we have achieved an equality which was never possessed by any other people. Even in the less important matter of material possessions we have secured a wider and wider distribution of wealth. The rights of the individual are held sacred and protected by constitutional guaranties, which even the Government itself is bound not to violate. If there is any one thing among us that is established beyond question, it is self government; the right of the people to rule. If there is any failure in respect to any of these principles, it is because there is a failure on the part of individuals to observe them. We hold that the duly authorized expression of the will of the people has a divine sanction. But even in that we come back to the theory of John Wise that “Democracy is Christ’s government”. The ultimate sanction of law rests on the righteous authority of the Almighty.

On an occasion like this a great temptation exists to present evidence of the practical success of our form of democratic republic at home and the ever broadening acceptance it is securing abroad. Although these things are well known, their frequent consideration is an encouragement and an inspiration. But it is not results and effects so much as sources and causes that I believe it is even more necessary constantly to contemplate. Ours is a government of the people. It represents their will. Its officers may sometimes go astray, but that is not a reason for criticizing the principles of our institutions. The real heart of the American Government depends upon the heart of the people. It is from that source that we must look for all genuine reform. It is to that cause that we must ascribe all our results.

It was in the contemplation of these truths that the fathers made their declaration and adopted their Constitution. It was to establish a free government, which must not be permitted to degenerate into the unrestrained authority of a mere majority or the unbridled weight of a mere influential few. They undertook the balance these interests against each other and provide the three separate independent branches, the executive, the legislative, and the judicial departments of the Government, with checks against each other in order that neither one might encroach upon the other. These are our guaranties of liberty. As a result of these methods enterprise has been duly protected from confiscation, the people have been free from oppression, and there has been an ever broadening and deepening of the humanities of life.

Under a system of popular government there will always be those who will seek for political preferment by clamoring for reform. While there is very little of this which is not sincere, there is a large portion that is not well informed. In my opinion very little of just criticism can attach to the theories and principles of our institutions. There is far more danger of harm than there is hope of good in any radical changes. We do need a better understanding and comprehension of them and a better knowledge of the foundations of government in general. Our forefathers came to certain conclusions and decided upon certain courses of action which have been a great blessing to the world. Before we can understand their conclusions we must go back and review the course which they followed. We must think the thoughts which they thought. Their intellectual life centered around the meeting-house. They were intent upon religious worship. While there were always among them men of deep learning, and later those who had comparatively large possessions, the mind of the people was not so much engrossed in how much they knew, or how much they had, as in how they were going to live. While scantily provided with other literature, there was a wide acquaintance with the Scriptures. Over a period as great as that which measures the existence of our independence they were subject to this discipline not only in their religious life and educational training, but also in their political thought. They were a people who came under the influence of a great spiritual development and acquired a great moral power.

No other theory is adequate to explain or comprehend the Declaration of Independence. It is the product of the spiritual insight of the people. We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them. The things of the spirit come first. Unless we cling to that, all our material prosperity, overwhelming though it may appear, will turn to a barren scepter in our grasp. If we are to maintain the great heritage which has been bequeathed to us, we must be like minded as the fathers who created it. We must not sink into a pagan materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which they had for the things that are holy. We must follow the spiritual and moral leadership which they showed. We must keep replenished, that they may glow with a more compelling flame, the altar fires before which they worshiped.

Hat tip to “A Very American Birthday”

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent “Austrian language,” would you have brushed it off as a  minor slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States , would you have said that he is clueless.

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas , would you have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had misspelled the word “advice” would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoes as proof of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low  over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown   Manhattan  causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually  get what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in  New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue  with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved.

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can’t think of anything? Don’t worry. He’s done all this in 15 months — so you’ll have two years and nine months to come up with an answer.

(this was provided to me via email by a great friend)

There’s been a lot written already about Elena Kagan’s nomination to SCOTUS.  People have been talking about how she’s never been a judge before or how there is limited evidence of her views and how she would rule.

I’m here to tell you that Ms. Kagan has already disqualified herself with one statement. There is no need for anyone to do any more searching or pour over documents or try to dig up dirt.

This comes directly from a post on the site Kagan Watch and the bold emphasis is from the author and not me.

In a questioner from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R) about gun rights during her confirmation to be Solicitor General, Kagan had this to say:

“Once again, there is no question, after Heller, that the Second Amendment guarantees individuals the right to keep and bear arms and that this right, like others in the Constitution, provides strong although not unlimited protection against governmental regulation.”

Did you catch that? No not the blatant disregard for the Second Amendment. It’s not the effort Ms. Kagan puts into trying to rewrite the Second Amendment either.

Have you found it yet? It’s only two words.  Give up?

“… after Heller…”

Ms Kagan reveals that case law would be the basis for any decisions she makes as a Justice of SCOTUS, not the Constitution as it was written and originally intended.

Just so there’s no confusion. Let’s look at Federalist Paper No. 78:

“There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other departments, it may be answered, that this cannot be the natural presumption, where it is not to be collected from any particular provisions in the Constitution. It is not otherwise to be supposed, that the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives of the people to substitute their will to that of their constituents. It is far more rational to suppose, that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.

Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental.”

Alexander Hamilton

In other words, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, not case law.

Based on Ms. Kagan’s own words, she has disqualified herself from ever serving the citizens of this great country as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

I’ve been having a “conversation” with a couple of people on Twitter in regards to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and felt that it needed more than just a couple of tweets about it.

It all started with Bill Maher’s tweet above. Now I know that Bill Maher is allegedly an entertainer, at least he tries desperately to play one on TV. The problem with this tweet is it’s ignorant and unfortunately many people retweeted as a valid response to drilling here.

Every single person in the U.S. uses petroleum every single day. Obviously we use it in our cars everyday. Now stop what your doing and look around you. Notice every thing that is plastic or has plastic in it. It’s petroleum based.  Petroleum is so ingrained in every single person’s life on this planet that they cannot live without it. So let’s acknowledge reality – petroleum is a part of our lives whether we like it or not. So if you’re a person on this planet who uses petroleum and you didn’t chant “Drill Baby Drill” you too should report to the Gulf Coast for cleanup duty.

Manu Kumar, whom I’ve never met personally but I have high respect for what he’s done both as entrepreneur and a venture capitalist, tweeted the following:

I believe that we are overlooking the fact that had we, as a country, adopted a solid comprehensive energy plan for America oh starting 40 years ago then we would not be where we are at today.

Alternative energies is the buzzword of the day and the last time I checked we aren’t running planes, trains, and automobiles on wind or solar and we won’t be for a very long time to come. If ever. You need sun and wind 24/7/365 days across the globe to make that happen.  I don’t believe that wind or solar makes plastic either.  Alternative energies need to be researched for viability, both short and long term, first. No one should pile on the “environmental” band wagon for the sake of saying your concerned about Earth when in reality it’s a political agenda. If you want to get a picture of just how green the manufacture and operation of a hybrid car is please consider this eye-opener.

Think about where America would be now if we had been building nuclear power plants for the past 30-40 years. It is the cleanest form of mass distributable energy out there.  We would be less dependent on foreign produced oil today in a big way if we had started building nuclear plants decades ago. To the people who want to start talking about the possible dangers of nuclear energy and the storage of spent nuclear fuel – go talk to France.

Now let’s look at oil. Let’s start with who we import oil from. More oil is imported into the U.S. from non-OPEC countries than OPEC countries.  You can see this information from the U.S. Energy Information Administration here.

We know that OPEC sets the price of oil pretty much for the world.  If OPEC announces that they are increasing the production capacity of it’s oil then oil prices will drop. We also know that competition brings about a reduction in prices as well.

Keeping that in mind, I want you to carefully consider the following:

The U.S. has a 1.5 Trillion Barrel oil shale reserve in Colorado and Wyoming. That is 5 times the reserves of all of Saudi Arabia.

Think about that for a second. What if we announced to the world that the U.S. is opening up drilling both onshore and off in America?  It would have an immediate effect.  The oil futures contracts would plunge dramatically across the world and reduce the price of oil immediately before we even drilled one inch.

“But Pete, extracting oil from shale is costly and damages the environment” you say.  Well, that would have been true a decade ago but there has been some incredible developments in shale oil extraction technology.

Royal Dutch Shell, in fact, has recently completed a demonstration project (The Mahogany Ridge project) in which it produced 1,400 barrels of oil from shale in the ground, without mining the shale at all. DailyReckoning.com

The article further shows that for every unit of energy used to extract the oil from the shale, 3-4 units of energy are produced. It would also bring the price per barrel of oil in at around $40. Once the process is started it takes about 3-4 years for it to reach mass production.

Think about this for a minute:

• We would no longer be even remotely dependent on foreign oil.
• The price of oil would drop dramatically.
• America would reap enormous revenues exporting our oil to other countries.
• A portion of that revenue, which is larger than any high gas tax ever will be, can be used for investment in the research & development of alternative energies.
• America would not be “subsidizing” terrorism by purchasing foreign produced oil.

I strongly encourage everyone to read the full article at Daily Reckoning – Oil Shale Reserves.

• We need a COMPREHENSIVE energy policy that includes fossil fuels, alternative energies, and sound economics.
• The construction of nuclear power plants across the U.S. needs to be started immediately.
• We need to open up onshore and offshore drilling, extraction, and production in the U.S. immediately. Yes, there will be accidents but no one should use them for any type of political agenda like the Gulf spill is being used now.
• Try this for a week – be aware of every petroleum based product you use or come in contact with.
• Think what your world would be without petroleum – No cars, no computers, no cell phones, the list is endless.

I don’t know about you but I’m tired of looking at my children and knowing that we are not leaving this planet a better place for them.  That goes for the economic, political, and conservation areas.

I encourage everyone to not act like the child Bill Maher is. This is not a joke people.