On July 30, 1956 President Eisenhower signed a law officially declaring "In God We Trust" to be our nation's motto. The phrase would also be printed on paper money. The phrase was printed on coins long before, during the Civil War era. In 1954 at a Flag Day speech, Eisenhower stated that, "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war."
Alexis de Tocqueville was a Frenchman who came to America in 1831 to study its prisons and penitentiaries. He was a very astute judge of the American character and wrote his classic Democracy in America following his two year stay. The below quote is from this book. Apparently, he was very prescient. We had better start treating his writings as if they were precautionary in nature - because they probably were. I hope that it is not already too late.
On July 22, 2003, U.S. Army Private Jessica Lynch returned home after being rescued from an Iraqi hospital. On March 23, 2003, Jessica was riding in a supply convoy when her unit took a wrong turn and was ambushed by Iraqi forces. Eleven American soldiers died and Lynch and four others were captured. Lynch was taken to an Iraqi hospital, due to some injuries she sustained during the ambush. On April 1st, she was rescued by U.S. Special Forces. Upon her return, the media framed her as a hero and war icon and added many false and heroic details to her story. Lynch later testified that she did not try to fight back- she had been knocked unconscious and could not remember what had happened. She stated that she was treated fine in the Iraqi hospital. Lynch also stated that "I am still confused as to why they chose to lie and tried to make me a legend when the real heroics of my fellow soldiers that day were, in fact, legendary. The truth of war is not always easy to hear but is always more heroic than the hype." Nice that she came clean, but she probably didn't make any friends on the Left who wanted to use her fabricated hero story to further their agenda of putting women in harm's way because it is their "right." National Defense is not an area in which the general public should be willing to accept social science experiments. Unfortunately, it is an area that the Left loves to use for just this purpose. Once they force an agenda down the throats of the military, it's easy to portray it as acceptable for the rest of society. Women in combat is not something we should accept.
How could those peace-loving do-gooders of the Gaza flotilla be considered a “bad guy?” All they’re trying to do is bring much-needed relief to the poor, oppressed citizens of Gaza, right? Wrong! Read this article by Mario Loyola of National Review Online to learn the cold, hard truth about these law-breaking useful idiots of the enemy. Here are just a few tidbits from the article for those who don’t have time to read the whole thing (hopefully not because they are too busy watching reality television).
- -The people of Gaza get plenty of international charity. Any and all humanitarian aid can get to Gaza by simply going through an Israeli checkpoint to ensure there are no dangerous items.
- -The Israeli blockade is legal under International law and has been endorsed by Egypt, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the European Union and the United Nations Security Council.
- -Hamas, a terrorist organization, is the government of the Palestinian Authority. These so-called peace activists (especially the Americans among the group) may be committing felonies by providing “material support or resources” to a foreign terrorist organization.
- -Hamas has officially endorsed the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a key foundational document of 20th century racism and totalitarianism linked to Hitler and his evil regime. This is the evil organization to whom these young “peace-activists” and humanitarians are providing aid and comfort.
- As President Bush said in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11, “You’re either with us or against us.” The Gaza flotilla crowd falls into the second category. Bad Guys!
While demonized as racists and extremists, Tea Party-ers are normal people who are fed up with what big government is doing to our country and are willing to stand up against it. They are, quite literally, supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States of America. Someone needs to do it!
In the ongoing debate concerning the issue of the debt ceiling and whether or not to increase it, Republicans are now proposing a new plan known as “Cut, cap and balance.” The “balance” portion of the plan refers to a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Simply, Congress would raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion but that increase would only go into effect if both houses of Congress pass – with two-thirds majorities – a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution and send it to the states for ratification.
Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Here is what it says:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Here is what it means: There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution. First, and this is the only method that has actually been used, Congress can pass a proposed amendment by a two-thirds vote of the members present in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The President’s approval is not required. Under the second method, two-thirds of the states must petition Congress to call a constitutional convention. After the amendment has been proposed, there are two methods prescribed for ratification of amendments. Both ratification methods rely on the states. A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution when approved by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states or when approved by ratifying conventions of three-fourths of the states. So, in a nutshell, the Federal government and State governments each play an important role in modifying the law of the land as laid down by our very wise Founding Fathers.
Father Robert McTeigue was the Commencement speaker for Ave Maria University’s graduating class of 2011. This quote came directly from his speech. To the indoctrinated, unthinking automatons of modern society it may seem that he is advocating mean-spiritedness and hatred – because that is what they have been taught. We all must just go along to get along, and who are we to judge others, right? Wrong, wrong, wrong! There are such things as “slippery slopes” and we’re sliding down a steep one as a society right now. Look around you and what do you see our kids doing? Dressing like prostitutes, sexting, hooking up, having friends with benefits, choosing “alternative lifestyles.” Where does it all end? If we always try to “choose our fights wisely” we end up never drawing a line anywhere and we end up losing everything. It’s time now to stop tolerating bad manners, disrespect for traditions and customs, sinful behavior…the list goes on and on. We need more teachers in our schools like Father McTeigue. Here is the quote and this takes you to a video of the entire speech and this will take you to an article by Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review:
“Socrates was intolerant of the Sophists. Moses was intolerant of Pharaoh. Jesus was intolerant of the Pharisees. Frederick Douglass was intolerant of slavery. Blessed Rupert Mayer was intolerant of the Nazis. Blessed Mother Teresa was intolerant of abortion. Blessed Pope John Paul was intolerant of the culture of death. Intolerance can be a beautiful thing — you just need to know how to do it properly.”
On 15 July 1979, Jimmy Carter delivered his infamous “malaise speech” in which he actually never used the word “malaise.” It was more properly dubbed the “Crisis of Confidence speech.” He addressed the nation that day via television and in the address discussed the ongoing energy crisis and recession. Carter expressed his thought that the underlying cause of the economic crisis was a lack of “moral and spiritual confidence.” To his credit (and believe me I cringe when I write that because I don’t think he deserves credit for much of anything) he admitted that part of the problem (a small part in his mind) was his failure to provide strong leadership on several issues, including mainly energy and fuel policies. He then went on, however, to attack the American way of life by claiming that Americans’ obsession with consumerism and materialism had overridden spiritualism and community values. He implored the nation to have faith in the future of America and to strive to reclaim their unity of purpose so that we could “seize control again of our common destiny.” He then moved on to propose some serious government interference in the oil free market including mandatory conservation efforts for individuals and businesses, import quotas and a "massive commitment of funds and resources" to develop alternative fuel sources including coal, plant products and solar power. Does any of this sound familiar? Seems like once again we are “mired in a crisis of confidence.” Why is it that so-called progressives always place the blame elsewhere and then prescribe more government interference to cure economic problems. Ronald Reagan defeated Carter the following year in part because he reminded all of us that the government was not the solution to the problem, it was the problem. We sure could use another man (or woman) like Reagan right about now.
The Golden Gate Bridge is a suspension bridge that spans the Golden Gate, which is the opening of the San Francisco Bay into the ocean. It was the longest suspension bridge in the world when it was completed and has become one of the most internationally recognized landmarks in the world. Eight other bridges have since surpassed its span length, but it is still the second longest in the United States behind the Verazzano-Narrows Bridge in New York City (made famous by the Mafia for their use of it as a gangplank of sorts). The American Society of Civil Engineers declared it one of the modern Wonders of the World. Construction began in January, 1933 and was a $35 million dollar project. It was finished in April 1937 and was $1.3 million under budget. Innovative movable safety netting saved many men during the course of the construction. Of the eleven men who fell to their death, ten were killed in one incident when the net failed under the weight of a scaffold that had fallen.
Interestingly, the famous International Orange color was originally used as a sealant for the bridge. Local residents persuaded the designer to paint the bridge in the bright orange color instead of the standard darker colors. It has remained orange ever since. The US Navy wanted it to be painted with black and yellow stripes to ensure visibility by passing ships. The Navy has never had much fashion sense.
Wait, surely I can't be saying that the Big Oil companies, those earners of "obscene profits" are good guys. Yes, I am. They are easily and too often demonized by the same politicians who receive very handsome perks from "Big Oil" in the way of campaign contributions. Did you know, for instance, that President Barack Obama received $884,000 from the oil and gas industry in the 2008 campaign year. That was more than any other lawmaker with one exception - yep, John McCain. In 2009-2010, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D) from Arkansas led the way. Ever hear the phrase "biting the hand that feeds you?"
So, now the same party who said that the Constitution doesn't matter (with regard to the Health Care debate, among other issues) is trying to misuse the Constitution to achieve their desires with regard to the Debt limit debate. Remember when they were accusing our last President of shredding the Constitution and trying to grow the Executive powers. In misreading the 14th amendment that is exactly what they are trying to do now. Bottom line on this debate can be found in one of the bedrock principles of our Founding document: Separation of Powers. See the diagram. It appears that the Founding Fathers were pretty clear on which branch controls the purse and makes laws. Hint: It wasn't the Executive.
This quote comes from Whittaker Chambers' great autobiography, Witness. I think the Founding Fathers would have agreed.
"Freedom is a need of the soul, and nothing else. It is in striving toward God that the soul strives continually after a condition of freedom. God alone is the inciter and guarantor of freedom. He is the only guarantor. External freedom is only an aspect of interior freedom. Political freedom, as the Western world has known it, is only a political reading of the Bible. Religion and freedom are indivisible. Without freedom the soul dies. Without the soul there is no justification for freedom."
In God we trust!
Located in Davidson County, Tennessee, Andrew Jackson's plantation is now a historical site and museum. 
It is appropriate that today, Independence Day, is also the birthday of President Ronald Reagan's favorite President, Calvin Coolidge. "Silent Cal" is also the only president born on the Fourth of July. The Heritage Foundation calls Coolidge "one of the most eloquent defenders of America’s principles" and if you take some time to read about him you will certainly agree. Here is what Coolidge said about the Declaration of Independence: “"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."
A President who mouthed those words had to be pretty good - especially if he believed them, which Cal apparently did. That's how he governed. He believed very firmly that if it ain't broke, you don't have to fix it - and during his term in office, everything was going pretty well. He probably also believed that if it does appear to be broke (free market-wise) it will probably fix itself. Maybe if he had stayed around for another term, we would not have had to deal with the Great Depression.
Linked below is a (typically) powerful Thomas Sowell article. He makes some very important points in a short article in terms that everyone can understand. The main takeaways from this article about the Constitution are these:
The American Revolution was more than just our own Revolution against the King of England. It was a Revolution against a form of government in which a small ruling cadre decided how much freedom would be permitted the people.
- Our fundamental document, the Constitution (of course), begins with the three words “We the People.” Other nations have Constitutions, but none begin with the fundamental and underlying premise that the government draws its power from the people – not the other way around. Progressives and liberals don’t feel particularly fond about the Constitution because it restrains them from planning the lives of the unwashed masses (we, the people).
- Since the early 20th century, so-called progressives have been trying to discredit the Constitution and water down its power. Their arguments have not changed since those days and they are still as feeble. They say, always, that the Constitution did not foresee all the technological advancements of the modern age and that because of that it is obsolete. Thomas Sowell (and I) say “nonsense!” And here I will quote Mr. Sowell directly: “A constitution exists to create a framework for government — and the Constitution of the United States tries to keep the government inside that framework.” He goes on to refute Time Magazine’s claim that the Constitution does not limit government by stating the 10th amendment, which makes clear the founders’ intent that the federal government would be limited to those powers given to it by the people (we, the people – remember?). These are the enumerated powers.
- More than anything else, the Constitution has ensured our freedom and our exceptionalism. Read it today – and read it to your kids!
