Conservative Republican? Really?

My dear friend, Frantz Kebreau, has dedicated his life to saving of America…twice. The first time, Frantz pledged his life for our country as a member of the United States Air Force. More recently, he put his life on hold, sacrificing his career and time with his family to travel this country to teach us all the importance of a color-blind society. His call is an honorable one, and he is not alone. My heart is stirred by several others, who have become dear friends, as well. Pastor C.L. Bryant has given his life to “warn the world of economic slavery, to unlock the shackles of tyranny by teaching Liberty” through his message and his film, Runaway Slave. My new friend, K. Carl Smith, founder of the Conservative MESSENGER, dedicated his life to advancing the message and movement of the Frederick Douglass Republicans. There are so many more that fight daily to save America from tyranny and convince us not to give into the chains and slavery of racism and class warfare.

Given my belief in these dear men and their mission, you can imagine how my heart wept over the statement Florida Commissioner of Agriculture made to reporters recently. Mr. Putnam stated that he was “disappointed”in the current composition of the Department of Agriculture, indicating his Agriculture Department being 78 percent white was “not acceptable”. I fail to understand how he can simply look at the “color” of his employees and determine that their employment is “not acceptable.”

Is Mr. Putnam saying that the Commissioners of Agriculture before him engaged in discriminatory hiring practices? Is Mr. Putnam saying that he can look at the color of someone’s skin and determine that they are not qualified for a job? I would not consider this a historically Republican thought process.

Mr. Putnam made the statement to reporters, “I was disappointed, but not shocked,” Putnam said of the department’s demographics. “I came into this knowing we weren’t where we need to be.” Funny, I don’t remember Mr. Putnam mentioning affirmative action principles as a platform for his election to the Commissioner of Agriculture in 2010. I was fairly active in that election term, attending many rallies across the state, hearing many campaign stump speeches, even hearing the same speeches multiple times. I had heard Mr. Putnam speak in many forums; he is quite a dynamic speaker, actually. However, I never heard him express his disappointment with the racial composition of the Department of Agriculture, nor did I ever hear him campaign that he was going to make it his mission to“diversify” the Department. As a matter of fact, Mr. Putnam ran a campaign on conservative Republican principles, I am SURE that if this had been a campaign promise made by Mr. Putnam, it would have been something of great interest.

Running as a Conservative Republican, Mr. Putnam had to know that picking up the affirmative action mantle would not have been a popular stance. Those who believe in the truly “republican” America (as a principle not a party) know that the fight for a color-blind America has been a battle that lovers of Liberty and Freedom have engaged in for decades. One of those great fighters was Frederick Douglass. Mr. Douglass was an anti-slavery orator and writer. He described himself:

I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intended to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress.

Mr. Douglass gave a speech in Washington, D.C, at the 24th Anniversary of the Emancipation (1886), and said:

“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe”

Mr. Douglass fought for equality of men through a colorblind society. He also fought for the equality of women, championing the motto “Right is of no sex—Truth is of no color”. Mr. Douglass was the embodiment of the fight for a colorblind society and plowed a path for another great man, whom many are more familiar with, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dr. King dreamt of nation where all are equally free, judged by their CHARACTER and not the COLOR OF THEIR SKIN. In this battle for a colorblind society, Dr. King stated,

I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality… I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.

Dr. King, as a Republican, was fighting for a day where the world would shed the desire to engage in an affirmative action, a philosophy “where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress”. Yet, here we are today, still promoting this race warfare mentality and it comes from a surprising source; a Republican Commissioner of Agriculture of Florida.

The men that I have mentioned above are champions of this cause. These men, since the founding of our nation have been fighting to educate the people. James Madison stated in an article written for the National Gazette, December 20, 1792:

“Although all men are born free, slavery has been the general lot of the human race. Ignorant – they have been cheated; asleep – they have been surprised; divided – the yoke has been forced upon them. But what is the lesson? …the people ought to be enlightened, to be awakened, to be united, that after establishing a government they should watch over it…. It is universally admitted that a well-instructed people alone can be permanently free.”

When are we going to embrace the understanding that equality demands, equal standing in the eyes of the people? When are we going to understand the battles that have raged for over a hundred years are still being promoted today through the teaching of racism through the affirmative action agenda? We must understand that we have a great stolen history. If we are ever to have Liberty that understands that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. We must shed the chains and slavery of the racist agenda of class and race warfare.

We must educate ourselves on the essential principle of Liberty that demands a colorblind society. We must watch our government as James Madison demanded. We must tell our elected representatives, like Mr. Adam Putnam that we will no longer tolerate the propagation of slavery and racism embodied in the principles of affirmative action. We will not tolerate anything less than a government that believes that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL and are all entitled to Liberty and Justice.

As a final observation to this thought. When you are searching for this information you will find that there are only THREE media outlets that reported on this issue, one of which simply refers to the other. I am grateful to my local media source WJTK 96.5 “The Jet” for reporting this issue and bringing it to our attention. What is going on in the media when we cannot find journalists who are willing to report the truth? This is exactly the archaic thought process of the establishment that has hijacked our nation and that we are trying so hard to overcome. We The People must inform ourselves on the truth about our elected representatives. Listen to what they say and over their term they will show their TRUE NATURE. You may ask why am I so angry at Adam Putnam? Simply, because I am beginning to believe he stole my vote, and nobody likes a thief.

21st Century Slavery

“Our tax code is the 21st Century version of slavery…the IRS has become the overseer of the American People.”  To many, this seems like an absurd radical statement; but, when you look at this statement from an historical perspective, you might just come to a different conclusion.

Throughout history, taxes have been a way to control the people.  My Bill of Rights presentation begins with the year 1014.  England was constantly being plagued by Kings who were greedy or wanting to finance their own adventures through the taxation of the people.  Although the oppression of taxation is evident throughout history, the best place to analyze this statement on modern taxation begins with King John and his reign in 1189.

King John, popularized by the tale of Robin Hood (who by the way was not robbing the rich and giving to the poor, but returning oppressive taxes back into to the hands of the people), took over while his brother Richard the Lion-Heart was fighting in the Crusades.  It was said of King John that he “plundered his own people”, he was “cruel towards all men” and “Hell itself was fouled by the presence of John”.  In 1207 King John introduced the first income tax in England.  Taxation at that time was established at one thirteenth of “rents and moveable property”.   Taxes were collected locally by sheriffs and administered by the Exchequer.  His brutal policies and excessive taxation brought him into conflict with his barons, the land and business owners. Taxes imposed by King John were excessive to the point of oppressive.  This did not matter to the King as these taxes served to double his income for the year, and served to finance his adventures.  Even though the taxes levied by King John were exorbitant, he is most known for his punishments against defaulters.  He was ruthless, showing favor only to those who suited his needs.  The taxations of King John lead to a rebellion of the barons.  A direct result of this rebellion was the adoption of the Magna Carta.  The Magna Carta of 1215 made the King promise that no taxes except the regular feudal dues were to be levied, and except by the consent of the Great Council, or Parliament.

All the way back to 1215 people agreed that excessive taxation was an evil and oppressive form of government.  That did not stop Kings from becoming tyrannical with taxation.  In 1628, to end rebellion and secure the crown, Charles I had to sign the 1628 Petition of Rights, once again, promising that there would be no taxation without proper representation.  Again, in 1689, as a result of the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the fathers of our founders made William of Orange promise to not impose taxation without proper representation.

The fundamental importance of this brief trip through history is to first to recognize throughout history that taxation was often used as a tool for oppression.  Secondly, we must understand that our founders, when coming to this continent, carried with them not only their Bill of Rights of 1689, but all the promises of each King contained in each of these documents listed.  These promises all recognized the evil and oppressive nature of excessive taxation and the promise of each King to not abuse this tool of government.

So when George III began engaging in the very behavior of oppressive taxation, that each of these documents guaranteed he would not do, our founders called it like they saw it.  Thomas Paine wrote in Common Sense:

If, from the more wretched parts of the old world, we look at those which are in an advanced stage of improvement we still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretences for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey, and permits none to escape without a tribute…What at first was plunder, assumed the softer name of revenue

Take note of the long tradition of tyrants to use the word “revenue” to describe their oppressive acts.  Terms like “greedy” and “plunder” were not the end of the strong language used by our founders.  Sam Adams made the following observation in his response to King George III’s taxes invoked in the Stamp Act.

for if our trade may be taxed, why not our lands? Why not the produce of our lands and everything we possess or make use of? This we apprehend annihilates our charter right to govern and tax ourselves. It strikes at our British privileges, which, as we have never forfeited them, we hold in common with our fellow-subjects who are natives of Britain. If taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the character of free subjects to the miserable state of tributary slaves?

The women of the Revolution were not foreign to this understanding either.  Over 50 women, led by Penelope Barker, signed this oath in opposition to the oppressive taxation of George III:

 “We, the aforesaid Ladys will not promote ye wear of any manufacturer from England until such a time that all acts which tend to enslave our Native country shall be repealed.”

Hannah Winthrop, while observing the destruction of Tea in the Boston Harbor, a direct protest of the oppressive taxation of George III, stated:

Yonder, the destruction of the detestable weed, made so by cruel exaction, engages our attention. The virtuous and noble resolution of America’s sons, in defiance of threatened desolation and misery from arbitrary despots, demands our highest regard.

This assessments of our government’s policies on taxation, especially under this current administration, are not so radical after all.  Many of us have come to these conclusions on our own.  Understanding that oppressive taxation is a direct assault on Liberty should give us a boldness and courage to stand against this popular form of tyranny.  Sam Adams gave this challenge in 1771 that seems rather relevant today:

Let us remember that “if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom!  It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that MILLIONS YET UNBORN MAY BE THE MISERABLE SHARERS IN THE EVENT.”

Maybe we should be asking the same questions of our neighbors that Patrick Henry asked of his in 1775:

“What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?”

Heroines of the New Revolution

Liberty Leaders, Liberty Fighters, Liberty Lovers, Liberty Ladies

Attending the CNN Tea Party debate was a very interesting experience.  I have to congratulate Amy Kremer for elevating this event to a level that allowed the Tea Party people, the heartbeat of this nation, a respectable forum for debate.  I am very proud that Billie Tucker was able to show the world the spirit of the strong, educated, and God emboldened women that make up the Tea Party movement. Anyone who would argue that the Tea Party is not a movement of the women hasn’t been watching very closely the last two years.

I had every intention when I sat down to write, to give my impressions of the candidates in the debate.  I suppose I’ll leave that to the pundits, because seeing Amy, Billie, and many other lady patriots in this movement do what they do, reminded me of the great women who were involved in the founding of our great nation.

Too many times we get fixated on the men, but that phenomenon is nothing new.  But the women that founded our nation suffered just as much, if not more.  The women that founded our nation sacrificed just as much, if not more.  Yet, what do we know about them?  Why do we write volumes upon volumes about Samuel Adams, yet hear very little of Elizabeth, his wife?  We are constantly reminded of Thomas Paine and his writings, but I have met very few that have ever heard of Mercy Otis Warren.  Why do we, even in the Tea Party movement, loudly and proudly proclaim the victories of Samuel Adams, yet I meet a miniscule portion of the population that have ever heard of Penelope Barker?  I am not a women’s libber, so I’ll not jump to various conclusions to answer these questions.  I do believe there are certain principles inherent in the nature of men and women that underpin our behaviors.  I believe that the women are the “heart” of our societies, whereas the men are the “brawn”.  It is a lot easier to recognize the muscle in the action, than the heart that drives it.

Regardless of human nature, throughout time, women have taken up the “sword” to fight for Liberty. Women have often recognized a principle that has become popular again through Sarah Palin’s vocalization of the understanding that women are naturally, extremely protective of their children.  Where men might fight for the temporal; land, money, family — women will fight more often for posterity.  They see attacks upon Liberty not as attacks on themselves, but as attacks on their children, their grandchildren, and generations to come.  This is the nature of the woman’s heart.

When I see my friends, Amy Kremer, Chair of the Tea Party Express and Stephanie Scruggs, co-founder of the National 9/12 movement, I think of my hero Penelope Barker.  Penelope Barker was the leader of the second Tea Party push.   Just ten months after Sam and his boys dumped tea all along the coast, Penelope Barker brought the women together with this statement:

“Maybe it has only been men who have protested the King up to now.  That only means we women have taken too long to let our voices be heard.”

Penelope Barker was so grieved at the way her mother country was treating the colonies, that she could stay silent no longer.  She had to make a statement.  She had to share that statement with the world, and did so with an unyielding boldness that so identifies the women of the founding of our nation and the women reclaiming our nation today.  She continues:

“We are signing our names to a document not hiding ourselves behind costumes like the men in Boston did at their tea party. The British will know who we are”.

Penelope could not effectuate a movement on her own; she had to have friends to help.  She found women who shared her passion and who were willing to give their lives and their homes to the holy cause of Liberty. Elizabeth King gave her home and her life to share in the battle for Liberty.  In the home of Elizabeth King, over 50 women met and signed an oath, pledging their lives to Liberty:

“We, the aforesaid Ladys will not promote ye wear of any manufacturer from England until such a time that all acts which tend to enslave our Native country shall be repealed.”

These women, so outraged at the oppression of an overbearing, Liberty-robbing, government, did not concern themselves with direct consequences.  These women were willing to put their lives and reputations on the line for their children.  But an even greater sacrifice is not well known.  A good number of the women who signed this pledge had husbands who were English Merchants.  They had to know that once word of their boycott got to England, their husbands would suffer the consequences.  These women decided that Liberty- the battle against tyranny- was more important than their husbands’ paychecks, or even their lives.

Our Penelopes have friends as well.  I assure you, every one of us knows women whose gift is to connect people, bring people together, and organize.  What about those who work diligently without that name recognition?  What about Debbie Ringhaver-Lane and the ladies of the Abigail Adams Project?   What about Barbara Samuells and the women of the 9/12 Super Seniors, Patricia Sullivan and the ladies of the Florida Tea Party Network, Linda Harper and the women of North Carolina, or Toby Marie, Katrina Pierson and all the ladies working so hard in Texas?  There are so many women who carry the spirit of our founding mothers.  I cannot possibly name them all.   They populate every state, every city, and every town. They have decided that Liberty is more important than a paycheck.  Just like our founding mothers before them, they have decided that they fear not what any man can do to them; Liberty belongs to their children, and they will not see it go without a fight.

I would be terribly grieved to not recognize one of my greatest heroes of the Revolution. Please, let me introduce you to Mercy Otis Warren.  Mercy had a passion that I can relate to that was sparked by a love that I share.  Mercy was the heart and the writer of the founding mothers. Although Mercy’s friend, Abigail Adams wrote many letters to the love of her life, John Adams, Mercy wrote many documents about the love of her life – Liberty – and the colonies that embodied it.

Mercy was a prolific author of anti-British propaganda plays and essays and an historian of the American Revolution.  Her friend, Abigail Adams, said in 1773 that Mercy was “a sincere lover of [her] country” It was said that Mercy was so grieved by Great Britain’s actions that she wept over the knowledge that the colonies were “oppressed and insulted”.   Mercy wrote:

“America stands armed with resolution and virtue; but she still recoils at the idea of drawing the sword against the nation from whence she derived her origin. Yet Britain, like an unnatural parent, is ready to plunge her dagger into the bosom of her affectionate offspring.”

Mercy’s heart was wounded at the idea that England would enslave the very people that loved her most.  I know many out there have wept with me in the spirit of Mercy Otis Warren.  My dear friend Debbie Gunnoe (Lt.Col, USAF ret.) and I have had such moments in conversation.  My dear friend, Carmen Reynolds (Lt.Col, USAF ret.) and I have spent so much time weeping and writing over the dagger being plunged in the bosom of American Exceptionalism.

But like the great women of the Revolution, we know the true strength of the America Spirit. We know the true source of Liberty. Mercy proclaimed they were…

“ready to sacrifice their devoted lives to preserve inviolate, and to convey to their children the inherent rights of men, conferred on all by the God of nature, and the privileges of Englishmen claimed by Americans from the sacred sanction of compacts.”

We understand that when God gives a gift and His people embrace and fight for that gift, victory is certain.  Even though victory is certain, we women must be acutely aware of the fears that we hold. I do believe Mercy said it best:

“I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that rise before us, there is no receding; and I should blush if in any instance the weak passions of my sex should damp the fortitude, the patriotism, and the manly resolution of yours. May nothing ever check that glorious spirit of freedom which inspires the patriot in the cabinet, and the hero in the field, with courage to maintain their righteous cause, and to endeavor to transmit the claim to posterity, even if they must seal the rich conveyance to their children with their own blood.”

Our founding mothers KNEW that they were engaged in a battle not just for themselves but for their children’s children.  They KNEW that nothing was too much to sacrifice so that gift of Liberty could be passed to their posterity.  They KNEW that if they did not stand, their children would bow.

So let me cry loud and clear the words of another great founding mother, Hannah Withrop:

“And be it known unto Britain, even American daughters are politicians and patriots, and will aid the good work with their female efforts.”

I would like to humbly dedicate this article to ALL the great women in the movement to restore America, to its founding principles and to the women of our Armed Forces who fight every day for Liberty.  God bless you and God bless America! ~once a Beachnut…~

U.N. Aquires More of the Everglades

On August 22, 2011 I wrote about the current collaboration of our state governments with the USDA, DOI, and UN to take private land ownership from the citizens of these states and turn it over to UN management. I specifically referenced a current effort in Florida where farmers and ranchers are “asked” to participate in a USDA program to increase the conservation easements that surround the Florida Everglades. Let me be abundantly clear, I am not opposed to the preservation of our natural resources. I am not opposed to the protection of Florida’s Everglades. What I am opposed to is handing over this land management to the UN. Let Florida protect the Everglades. Let Florida protect its natural resources. Then if there are trespasses on Liberty, Floridians then have recourse with their own representatives. Today, we have such little voice in DC, how less a voice will we have with the UN? Why is Adam Putnam, in his own email response, so eager to turn over the management of Florida to the UN through the USDA?

Informed Floridians, in an effort to protect private land ownership and prevent UN management of Florida property, contacted Adam Putnam’s office. (Bravo to these Floridians on becoming the engaged citizens our founders demanded.) Adam Putnam’s office has issued a statement to justify their non-involvement in this land grab. Since I am convinced that Mr. Putnam didn’t write this statement himself, I want to go through this statement so everyone can learn from this.

We should be so thankful to our anti-federalist founders for their insistence on greater state sovereignty. It is this very sovereignty, unique to the United States, which prevents a global takeover of the US by the UN, as it has done in every nation in Europe. These incremental land grabs are a global effort to remove state sovereignty, and join us with the rest of the world to be owned, managed, and operated by the UN. Unfortunately, Florida’s Commissioner of Agriculture, Adam Putnam, is completely ignorant of the intentions of our founders, the value of state sovereignty, and his role in protecting this vital principle.

Looking at the list of UN managed properties in the United States, I fear this is not an isolated occurrence, but an epidemic of ignorance of the people tasked with the very obligation to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and their respective States.

I say ignorance, because I still maintain a bit of hope that these efforts are not willfully collaborative. I do not want to believe that the very people that we trust to protect our property interests are knowingly giving it to the UN. You can call me naive if you like, I just understand how long we have failed to teach the truth and how miseducated our society truly is. As the engaged citizen government we are tasked to be educated on history and the truth. We must educate ourselves and educate our elected persons to maintain Liberty. James Madison warned us, “Only a well-instructed people can be a permanently free people.” My friends, we are far from free because we are far from being well-instructed.

Let’s get instructed. Mr. Putnam states in his response to the peoples’ attempt to instruct him that:

“This effort is part of the Wetland Reserve Program (WRP), a federal program administered by USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) that requires no state approval or acceptance. (emphasis added)”

This admission of the complete surrender of state sovereignty puzzles me. Mr. Putnam appears to believe this is a justification for his office to be uninvolved in these matters. How can any action between the federal government and farmers or ranchers of the state of Florida be conducted outside the oversight of the state? Where is the shield that our founder’s established to protect the people from federal abuse? James Madison, in a speech to Congress on June 8, 1789, pointed out that “the greatest opponents to Federal Government admit the State Legislatures to be sure guardians of the people’s Liberty.” If our “sure guardian” can just “check out” of the process, who will stand between the people’s Liberty and the Federal Government?

Mr. Putnam then continues and states:

“The NRCS negotiates directly with willing landowners that express an interest in participating in the program.”

This statement ignores the fact these lands will become conservation easements regardless of the “willingness of the participant”. The willingness revolves around the landowner’s desire to keep and maintain the easement or sell the easement to the Federal Government. It also ignores the fact that these easements will not be maintained by the State of Florida or the Federal Government, but by UNESCO based upon the UN committee’s assessment of the proper management of those lands.

Continuing with his justification of UN management of our land, Mr. Putnam all but admits that he and those tasked with the protection of Florida land are incapable of doing so. Therefore, in the words of Mr. Putnam, we must hand over these easements to the UN for management.

“Conservation easements yield significant economic benefits. Unlike past programs that took land off the tax rolls, out of production and were poorly managed by government, conservation easements help keep agriculture on the landscape and contributing to the economy by providing an incentive for families to keep land in production.”

It escapes me this idea that these farmers and ranchers will maintain some semblance of autonomy in the management of their lands. It is absolutely clear on the UNESCO World Heritiage Center website that when Florida allowed the Federal Government to declare the everglades a World Heritage site we established that Florida, and the land owners, must submit to the monitoring of these sites by the UNESCO. It also established that UNESCO then has the power and authority to seize control these sites if the World Heritage Committee determines intervention is necessary to properly maintain the sites. That mutable definition of “properly maintain” is now left solely to those who have proven to have no respect for state sovereignty, no respect for private land ownership, and an overwhelming goal to eliminate productivity in the name of global preservation. Why else would we need an organization whose entire objective is to protect geographical areas that have a global environmental or cultural significance? Let there be one endangered lizard or owl, one perceived danger in the use of fertilizers, one farmer growing a crop that is not environmentally symbiotic, or one rancher with too many cows per acre and we will see how much autonomy these ranchers and farmers really have. Mr. Putnam admits this very argument in his explanation of benefits for this program.

“These benefits include the protection of our valuable ground and surface water resources, critical habitat for endangered and threatened species and wildlife corridors that connect migration and foraging pathways; all while supporting jobs, communities and feeding our nation without depending on other nations.”

Never, in the history of UNESCO environmental management have these two clauses been compatible not only with each other, much less with the autonomy of private land owners. History and experience have PROVEN these ideas to be incompatible in the eyes of the UN and the environmentalist that serve on the World Heritage Committee. Alexander Hamilton is quoted to have said, “Experience is the oracle of truth, where its responses are unequivocal, they ought to be held to be sacred.” How is it that our founders knew and understood these principles and yet we are doomed to not only repeat their history but even our own?

I am not trying to single out Mr. Putnam. I believe that he could very well want what is best for Florida’s farmers and ranchers. But because he has allowed Florida to relinquish its obligated oversight, he has removed the ability to properly intervene on behalf of Floridians, without a significant legal battle and significant cost to the people of Florida. I believe he is misinformed, miseducated, and falsely persuaded. It is the absolute duty of those who have the truth to educate our members of the Legislature. Samuel Adams so aptly stated, “If we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our Liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.”

My sincere desire is that Mr. Putnam and others tasked with the protection of Liberty will learn from the warnings of our founders and heed to experience as the “oracle of truth”. Please, dear Legislatures, listen to the warning of John Adams, given in his inaugural address, and hear the voice of your people.

If our Government is negligent of its limitations, inattentive to its people’s recommendation, disobedient to its authority…if corruption is to overcome our Government and can be influenced by foreign nations..the Government may not be the choice of the American People, but of foreign nations. It may be foreign nations that govern us, and not we, the people, who govern ourselves.

Since I received a few unjustified or misplaced “criticisms” for my original post and this position, I will leave the critics with a quote from James Otis, Jr. Mr. Otis made this statement during his passionate argument before the State House against Writs of Assistance.

 “But I think I can sincerely declare that I cheerfully submit myself to every odious name for conscience’ sake; and from my soul I despise all those whose guilt, malice, or folly has made them my foes. Let the consequences be what they will, I am determined to proceed. The only principles of public conduct that are worthy of a gentlemen or a man are to sacrifice estate, ease, health, and applause, and even life, to the sacred calls of his country.”