Thursday, February 25, 2010

Laws Are Derived From the Consent of the People

The following article was written by Bob Livingston for Personal Liberty Digest.

Today is the day set for the televised bipartisan healthcare summit in which President Barack Obama and Republican legislators are supposed to discuss a healthcare overhaul.

In the days and weeks leading up to the summit, Republicans called on the president and Senate and House Democrats to scrap the unpopular Obamacare reform bills being discussed in conference. The House version passed by a slim majority with only one Republican vote and the Senate version passed with no Republican support and only after ridiculous multi-million dollar payoffs to a few of Democrats ensured a filibuster-proof majority.

The reform bills are widely unpopular among the citizenry—only 38 percent support them, according to—and are nothing more than a sop to big pharmaceuticals, insurance companies, trial lawyers and unions. And their passage led to a revolt in Massachusetts that saw Republican Scott Brown elected to a Senate seat that seemed a Democrat lock until a few days before the special election.

But while saying he was holding a summit with Republicans because he wanted to hear their ideas one minute, the president was saying a compromise bill currently being debated behind closed doors will be passed with a simple majority the next. Clearly, Democrats are hell-bent on paying off special interests and don’t care what the voters think.

In Anti-Federalist letter No. 1, Brutus (New York Judge and delegate to the Constitutional Convention Robert Yates) wrote:

“In a free republic, although all laws are derived from the consent of the people, yet the people do not declare their consent by themselves in person, but by representatives, chosen by them, who are supposed to know the minds of their constituents, and to be possessed of integrity to declare this mind.

“In every free government, the people must give their assent to the laws by which they are governed. This is the true criterion between a free government and an arbitrary one. The former are ruled by the will of the whole, expressed in any manner they may agree upon; the latter by the will of one, or a few. If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few.”

Democrats know the consent of the people is not behind them, yet they continue to march in lockstep, obviously bereft of integrity. If Democrats ram through the Obamacare healthcare monstrosity it should be clearer than ever that America is no longer a free republic but is now a nation ruled by a few elites.

By Bob Livingston

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Happy Birthday Karen!

Karen, Savannah, & Bill
(Karen is Sandy's daughter-in-law)

We hope you had a great birthday. We love you!

Friday, February 12, 2010

The Hand of God

February 11, 2010 by Bob Livingston

It’s amazing the lengths to which some will go in an effort to remove God from public discourse.

Activist liberal judges have tied themselves into knots in order to remove Christianity from public schools and nativity scenes from public property. Individuals have sued government to have the words, “In God We Trust” removed from coinage and to ban prayer, the 10 Commandments, Christmas parties and religious demonstrations from public schools.

And many of the comment strings that follow articles posted on Personal Liberty Digest seem to eventually devolve, at some point, into commenters debating religion and government—even when the original article is on another subject entirely. Inevitably one or more of the posters makes the false claim that the Founding Fathers were primarily somewhere between agnostic (the existence of God is unknown or unknowable) or practiced deism (denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe).

Nothing could be further from the truth. Depending on exactly who you consider to be the Founding Fathers—signers of the Declaration of Independence, signers of the Articles of Confederation, signers of the Constitution, delegates to the Constitutional Convention or all of the above—their religious affiliations were as follows: about 54 percent Epicopalian/Anglican, about 18 percent Presbyterian, about 16 percent Congregationalist and the rest either Quaker, Dutch/German Reformed, Lutheran, Catholic, Huguenot, Unitarian, Methodist or Calvinist.

The First Amendment to the Constitution is very clear, and the Constitution would not have been ratified without the promise of the passage of a Bill of Rights. It says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” While the Founders wanted to make sure that America didn’t become like England with a State Church, they also understood that there was a need for men to keep God in their lives.

Unfortunately, activist judges and Supreme Court Justices have either misunderstood that or deliberately sought to ignore it. As a result, courts have interpreted all manner of government bodies to be Congress. They’ve also placed emphasis on the first part of what has been termed the Establishment Clause while de-emphasizing the second.

The Founders would have objected to this interpretation as much as they would one that allowed Congress to pick a denomination and name it the State religion. The proof of this can be found in their own words.

“It is the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship.” John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776.

“The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights.” George Washington, to the Annual meeting of Quakers, September 1789.

“In the supposed state of nature, all men are equally bound by the laws of nature, or to speak more properly, the laws of the Creator.” Samuel Adams, letter to the Legislature of Massachusetts, Jan. 17, 1794.

“All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth—that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the Ground without his Notice, is it probable that an Empire can rise without his Aid?” Benjamin Franklin, To Colleagues at the Constitutional Convention.

“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?" Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virgina, 1782.

While many will claim that Franklin and Jefferson were deists, their writings indicate that they, like the rest of the Founding Fathers, believed God actually had a hand in affairs of men.
That’s something we need to remember as well. If we forget that, we are truly doomed as a nation.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

McCarthy Was Right!

February 10, 2010 by Chip Wood in Personal Liberty Digest

On Feb. 9, 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy (R.-Wisc.) gave a Lincoln’s Birthday speech in Wheeling, W.V., in which he asserted that scores of communists had infiltrated the U.S. State Department.

His charges, far from causing a nationwide fervor of anti-communist hysteria, as his critics have alleged, went mostly unnoticed at the time. Just two weeks earlier, Alger Hiss, then and now the darling of the left, was convicted of two counts of perjury for lying about being a spy for the Soviet Union. He was sentenced to life in prison.

We now know for certain, thanks to documents discovered in Moscow after the collapse of communism there, that McCarthy was, if anything, understating the case; and that Hiss was guilty of far more than perjury. He was a conscious and deliberate traitor to his country.

For nearly six decades, the left has conducted a relentless smear campaign against the junior senator from Wisconsin, making his name a symbol of irresponsible extremism. For an excellent account of what really did happen, get Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies, by M. Stanton Evans.

Truth may not forever be on the scaffold, nor deceit firmly on the throne. But for Joe McCarthy, who should be hailed as a genuine American hero, it certainly seems that way.

—Chip Wood