Signing Up For the Liberty First Brigade

 taegan meme
I would like to introduce Taegan, our newest Liberty First intern. She describes herself as:
~Iowa Native. Hillsdale College Student. Aspiring Attorney. Jesus Follower and Kingdom Worker. Avid Reader. Frequent Shopper. Developing Cigar Connoisseur. Pursuer of Truth and Defender of Liberty. The Future of America.~
Taegan has decided to write a blog every day describing the Liberty First life. So, in lieu of our regular #Point2Ponder I will be posting Taegan’s #LifeLibertyLaw blog.
I joked the other day that Taegan is like my Doctor Watson. I find these blogs very entertaining and inspirational.  This is her first blog.
I hope you enjoy reading about our adventures as much as we love living them. ~ In Liberty, KrisAnne

Signing Up For the Liberty First Brigade:

By Taegan James, Liberty First Intern

liberty first above all

A few months ago I received a text from my beloved grandfather that he had emailed KrisAnne Hall – Constitutional attorney, author, speaker, and talk show host – about a few issues floating around today’s political realm, and had mentioned me and a possible internship in the process. I was instructed to email her a bit about myself, explain why I want to intern for her, and what I hope to accomplish. In the hundreds or thousands of messages I have typed up, I do not think it has ever taken me so long to compose an email. I wanted to portray myself as a learned, professional individual, but seem likable and easygoing at the same time. Eventually, I hit the ‘send’ button, and anxiously waited for a reply. 24 hours felt like an eternity, but finally I saw the message in my inbox I had been waiting for. “Wonderful. Let me contact my assistant and  see the best fit for your traveling with us.” I couldn’t believe the words I had just read. This was it: I was going to intern for KrisAnne Hall and had officially signed up to be part of the Liberty-First Brigade. Now, as I prepare to leave for Idaho in two days, I am experiencing a wide range of emotions. I am both excited and nervous; confident, yet timid as I acknowledge that I know far less than my mentor. Above all, I am eager to learn and soak up all of the information and experience that I possibly can. More to come in the following days; stay tuned for all the adventures (and foreseeable blunders). Pursuing truth and defending liberty, always.

-A Devoted Patriot

#Point2Ponder: Learning From Our Mothers

Mercy_Otis_WarrenMy favorite founding mother: Mercy Otis Warren. Why don’t we know her? She gave so much so we could be free!

Mercy was the first American Woman playwright. She wrote Shakespearian style plays in the form of satire to poke fun at the British politicians and encourage the Liberty movement. If you are interested in this style of writing may I suggest Mercy’s play “The Ladies of Castile” it is brilliantly written.

In the preface of this play she included a letter she wrote:

“The nations have now resheathed the sword; the European world is hushed in peace; America stands alone: — May she long stand, independent of every foreign power; superior to the spirit of intrigue, or the corrupt principles of usurpation that may spring from the successful exertions of her own sons: — May their conduct never contradict the professions of the patriots who have asserted the right so human nature; nor cause a blush to pervade the cheek of the children of the martyrs who have fallen in defence of the liberties of their country.” Mercy Otis Warren A letter to a young gentleman in Europe, February 20, 1784

Mercy was very concerned about the role of women in politics. In both plays she placed women at the center of political upheavals. Although she did not believe that women should divorce themselves from politics. Through her characters Mercy suggests that a healthy republic required politically conscious women who were willing to make sacrifices for the public good.

Mercy was the first American woman historian. She wrote the most brilliant history of our War for Independence ever written! It is a three volume set titled “The Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution.” It is a must read for anyone interested in an original source history.

Mercy was such a strong leader and patriot. She a valued confidant to Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and many of the men and women who were our Liberty fighters. Abigail Adams said that Mercy was “a sincere lover of [her] country” and that Mercy was so grieved by Great Britain’s actions that she felt her nation to be “oppressed and insulted”.

Mercy is still a great source of strength and comfort for me today. It is inspirational to know that what her words and actions are available today to encourage a new movement of Liberty, built of the courageous women she hoped for and the resolved men she would love.

American_Revolutionary_Militia“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.”

Mercy is just one of the heroines that our sons and daughters are denied through this modern, progressive education system. We should be ashamed that someone like Mercy is ignored. But I do believe it shows the hypocrisy of the “women’s right’s movement.” If they really wanted to teach about brilliant, powerful, and independent women, Mercy would be on the top of their list!

Learn more about Mercy and other founding mothers here:

A book to TEACH our Youth about these forgotten founders:

#MothersDay #Moms #ThanksMom #womensrights #WomenWhoInspire

#Point2Ponder: Lesson on Gun Control

patrick henryPatrick Henry was a real thorn in the side of the tyrants occupying the British Government. Where would we be without men and women who were willing to put it all on the line and speak openly and freely about the government’s abuse of power and violation of our Rights? They weren’t worried about their jobs, their reputations, their finances, or their lives. They knew that Liberty was eternal and worth more than the temporary comforts of life.

It wasn’t just Henry’s “give me Liberty, or give me death speech” that the loyalist hated. Henry’s oratory skills and confidence made him a formidable foe and a real motivator to the colonists in the fight to restore the Liberties of the British Colonists.

We must not forget Henry’s impromptu defense of Lewis Craig, Joseph Craig, and Aaron Bledsoe for the crime of “preaching the Gospel of the Son of God” contrary to Virginia Law. Although often abused and ignored, Separation of Church and State had been a part of British Liberty since 1100.

Upon hearing of the charges against these men, Henry rode 60 miles to volunteer as their defense attorney.

“May it please your worships: I think I heard read by the prosecutor as I entered this house the paper I now hold in my hand. If I have rightly understood, the king’s attorney of this colony has framed an indictment for the purpose of arraigning, and punishing by imprisonment, three inoffensive persons before the bar of this Court, for a crime of great magnitude-as disturbers of the peace. May it please the Court, what did I hear read? Did I hear it distinctly, or was it a mistake of my own? Did I hear an expression as if a crime, that these men, whom your worships are about to try for a misdemeanor, are charged with—


and continuing in a low, solemn, heavy tone, “For preaching the Gospel of the Son of God!”

Henry was also and vocal supporter of the Right of the People to keep and bear arms. It was on this day in 1775 that Henry led an armed regiment of men to Williamsburg, demanding that the powder taken by Lord Dunmore be restored or replaced by the government to the people.

colonial soldiersHenry and his regiment of men forced the the King’s Receiver to restore the People of Williamsburg with 330 pounds of powder. Lord Dunmore believed that he had full right and duty to take that powder under the circumstances of national security and that the People were being “outrageous” and “rebellious” for questioning his power and demanding the restoration of their property. Lord Dunmore did not take kindly to this “show of force” and issued a statement against Patrick Henry and anyone who would support him:

By His Excellency the Right Honourable JOHN Earl of DUNMORE, His Majesty’ s Lieutenant and Governour General of the Colony and Dominion of VIRGINIA, and Vice-Admiral of the same.

VIRGINIA, to wit:

Whereas I have been informed, from undoubted authority, that a certain Patrick Henry, of the County of Hanover, and a number of deluded followers, have taken up arms, chosen their Officers, and, styling themselves an Independent Company, have marched out of their County, encamped, and put themselves in a posture of war, and have written and despatched letters to divers parts of the Country, exciting the people to join in these outrageous and rebellious practices, to the great terrour of all His Majesty’ s faithful subjects, and in open defiance of law and Government; and have committed other acts of violence, particularly in extorting from His Majesty’ s Receiver General the sum of Three Hundred and Thirty Pounds, under pretence of replacing the Powder I thought proper to order from the Magazine; whence it undeniably appears that there is no longer the least security for the life or property of any man: Wherefore, I have thought proper, with the advice of His Majesty’ s Council, and in His Majesty’ s name, to issue this my Proclamation, strictly charging all persons, upon their allegiance, not to aid, abet, or give countenance to the said Patrick Henry, or any other persons concerned in such unwarrantable combinations, but on the contrary to oppose them and their designs by every means; which designs must, otherwise, inevitably involve the whole Country in the most direful calamity, as they will call for the vengeance of offended majesty and the insulted laws to be exerted here, to vindicate the constitutional authority of Government.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Colony, at Williamsburgh, this 6th day of May, 1775, and in the fifteenth year of His Majesty’ s reign.


GOD save the King.

Those who do not know their history, are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

Don’t forget to visit for more Constitutional Education!


#Point2Ponder: Is Critical Thinking Dead?

thomas_paine-common_senseI am continually amazed at the lack of critical thinking exercised by the academic elite. Circular logic, ad hominem attack, and the ever so frequent “na na, I can’t hear you” responses are stunning.

I now understand why our framers found themselves engaging in eloquent bouts of sarcasm; it was their only way to maintain sanity while trying to reach the willingly ignorant. Is it just me or does it seem that the higher the education the less wisdom and greater incapability to critical thinking?

Thomas Paine leads off his essay The American Crisis, March 21, 1778 with this jewel:

“To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture. Enjoy, sir, your insensibility of feeling and reflecting. It is the prerogative of animals. And no man will envy you these honors, in which a savage only can be your rival and a bear your master.”

This is EXACTLY how I feel when I have these “discussions” with attorneys who seem to not only be happy in their utter servitude to the oligarchy of courts, but as a pathetic prisoner suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, even DEFEND their masters’ self acquired tyrannical prerogatives.

How can otherwise educated people be so colossally ignorant? How can such a large group of people be so blind to their own condition?

scotus rulers wsBest I can tell, its a matter of comfort and priority. They hold their entire identity and self worth in their education. Anything that challenges that paper doll must be rejected, refuted, and denied to maintain the illusion of their self-importance. Cognitive Dissonance.

As my husband is reading this, I know he is shaking his head. He is always telling me not to engage my time with the willingly ignorant on Facebook. But I am always hoping I can reach just one, or perhaps someone else reading can be helped.

So here is my conclusion after this ridiculously long Facebook conversation with this willful subject who claims to teach law.

Some people just like servitude. Some people will defend it to their last miserable enslaved breath. So I am done trying to reach those who have set aside reason. I am refocused on those who actually want to know the truth; those who actually want Liberty, and want to know what it is to actually be free. No matter what we do, no matter how much Liberty we preserve, there will always be people will go to great lengths to invent servitude for their own comfort.

Therefore, I am re-dedicating this ministry of #LibertyFirst to those who are seekers of truth, lovers of wisdom, and generous defenders of Liberty of all walks of life!

samuel adamsFor the rest, I will let Samuel Adams have the last word:

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom–go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”


#Point2Ponder: Choosing Security Over Liberty

me violateHow do we fall into the obvious trap of trading Liberty for Security? Do you remember when Al Sharpton was recently clambering to supplant our local law enforcement with the Department of Justice?

I want to bring something to light that may have eluded us; the federal government has NO AUTHORITY to have ANY armed agents beyond the military. Constitutionally speaking, any authority that is claimed to have armed federal agents must place these agents under the SAME umbrella as the military. That means:
Any use of armed federal agents within the States is a violation of posse comitatus. Can I repeat myself? If Congress has armed agents their only justification can be through their power to “raise and support armies.” That is Article 1 sec 8 clause 12. There is NO authority for an armed DOJ, EPA, DHS, FBI, FDA, or ANY of these unconstitutional federal agencies. Not only that, the power to raise and support an army is limited to TWO YEARS. Read this clause in the Constitution:

“The Congress shall have Power To …raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Termlynch treason than two Years….” Article 1 sec 8 clause 12

You may say, “Well that’s Al Sharpton, he’s crazy.” But truth be told that is exactly what we have when our Congress CONTINUES to fund these unconstitutional agencies with their unconstitutional power!

What about the DOJ and AG Loretta Lynch creating the “Strong Cities Network” in an effort to GLOBALIZE our local police forces?
Watch this and see how they are already doing this!

“America will never have a standing army, Americans would never support such tyranny” is what we hear. I am here to tell you America ALREADY has one (or two or three or…) and Americans already support this tyranny. Not only that, our local police and Sheriff, yoke up with these standing armies and allow our State and local governments to aid in this usurping of the Liberty of the people through the insidious tool of shared jurisdiction.
Please pay close attention to what founder Noah Webster said,

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.”

libertyWe might claim that Noah only meant we should prevent the “military” from forming a standing army. But I want to remind that Noah’s words were “military force, at the command of Congress.” We now claim that Congress can command “other forces” than the military, eg DHS, DOJ, FBI etc. So that would clearly make the clause “at the command of Congress” much more important than the word “military.”

Time for us to get EDUCATED to the tyranny that is really in front of us, behind us, and next to us, forcing us to submit to a standing army in the name of security.


#Point2Ponder: Why the TSA Is Operating Illegally

tsa terrorist wonDealing with the TSA is a very aggravating affair. What most Americans don’t realize is that not only is the TSA unconstitutional it is currently operating illegally. The TSA is violating, every day, the very law that created it.

On November 19, 2001, Congress passed The Aviation and Transportation Act, (ATSA), as a reaction to the September 11 attacks.

Read this:

We often see statements of how appalled or outraged our Congressmen are at the gross display of authority by the Transportation and Safety Administration (Incidentally they make the same statements about executive overreach and do nothing about it). They demand everything from control to dissolution of the TSA.

What is with all the posturing? Here is the real kick in the pants…

Congress created the TSA in 2001. In the ATSA, Congress established that after two years (in 2003) the airports had the power to privatize security and remove the TSA from the airports. In 2003, after a handful of airports began to do just that, the DOJ decided that privatization was unacceptable and threatened the airports with FAA violations if the airports went with private security. The DOJ even threatened the State of Texas by claiming they would make the State of Texas a “no fly zone” if Texans passed a law limiting the TSA. The law states that these airports can privatize. The TSA and DOJ are violating the law and using extortion methods to do it!

05112012_Congress_Spending_articleRead the DOJ’s letter to Texas:

How can the TSA turn around and tell the airports they will not leave when the law states otherwise? How can the TSA tell Congress that it will not allow airports to privatize. Congress has oversight over TSA, not TSA over Congress. Why has this fact gone relatively unnoticed? Why do our Congressmen continue to ignore their obligation to oversight?

P.S. Just because it will be mentioned…the TSA is not in violation of the 4th Amendment when they search without a warrant. When you buy your plane ticket, by contract you waive any 4th Amendment argument. The solution is to fly by private aircraft; they don’t get searched by the TSA.

Learn about the Congressional Oversight that should be expected and demanded by Americans:

#Point2Ponder: Religious Liberty's Bitter Pill

my-country-tisReligious Liberty may be the hardest pill to swallow in America, especially in light of “the war on terrorism.” But those who don’t know their history are begging us to repeat some very tragic mistakes.

When the Pilgrims arrived on this continent they were not searching for religious Liberty, they were fleeing religious persecution. The difference in these two ideas is evidenced by what they did when they got here. They didn’t set up new governments based upon Liberty of conscience, they established government mandated religion.

Not many know that within the original colonies men and women were fined, imprisoned, beaten, tortured, and even executed based upon their religious beliefs. Massachusetts had a law that stated if any shipman imported a Quaker in Mass., the shipman would be imprisoned and the Quaker would be hung. Yes, this is Massachusetts, not Iraq or China.

When government can mandate what we can and cannot believe tyranny is always the result. Therefore, learning from our history, we ought to be very careful when demanding that a person’s belief be made illegal.

mary dyer hangingSurely we wouldn’t do that in America, would we? That is exactly what we are doing when we demand that Islam be outlawed. We do not have to allow Shariah Law to allow Islam. We do not have to allow the violent acts to allow Islam. But we must allow people the Liberty to believe as they choose as long as those beliefs do not deprive anyone of their Liberties.

I have many tell me that we can outlaw Islam because it is not a religion it is an ideology. I say even moreso that is wrong. Liberty does not live in a place where government outlaws ideology or religion. Remember many say Liberty is an ideology and government would love to have the majority opinion to outlaw that.

Funny thing is that Islamic terrorists were not unknown at the time of our founding; look into the Barbary Pirates. Yet our framers established religious Liberty where “all could be equally free, Jews, Turks, Pagans, and Christians.”

Remember this, Islam has been a religion recognized by governments for centuries. Governments cannot distinguish one religion from the other without being tyrannical. The government that can outlaw Islam can outlaw Christianity just as easily. The sword you put in the hands of government to protect will easily become the sword that cuts you down.

barbary_coast_piratesWe don’t need to outlaw Islam to prosecute murderers and child abusers. Perhaps we have forgotten that Muslims have lived in America for centuries under our laws, why all of the sudden is that perceived to be impossible?

I am not wrong and history proves me right. I will not ever back down on this position. It is the only position that will allow my child to have Liberty of conscience. Unfortunately too many are ignorant of the consequences of the history they are trying to repeat.

I would also remind that Hilter did a very good job of convincing the German people that all of their economic and national security problems were because of the Jews. You cannot argue that that is different just because Jews were not really a threat. The government convinced the people that the Jews were such a threat that they all needed to be eliminated from the country. Most didn’t question or care how. What the people believed to be true drove this genocide.

Do we forget that Americans imprisoned Americans of Japanese decent and Hopi Indians because they were believed to be a national security threat? How many died in those camps?

That is not who America should ever be…again.

japanese internment 2 Japanese-Internment-Hero-ABSo let us remember when we allow government to outlaw something we give government the power to make laws and enforce them. What is the appropriate penalty for deviating from the government’s belief system? Who do you want to decide what is acceptable? Who do you want enforcing those laws? It wasn’t that long ago when Christians were executing Christians for their denominational differences.

We cannot allow government to outlaw any belief. Without freedom of thought there can be no Liberty and there is no limit to a government with that kind of power.

Religious Liberty requires government stay out of our churches, but it is Christians who have the hardest time making that happen. Because Christians have forgotten Matthew 6:24, No man can serve two masters, it is Christians who have invited government to destroy separation of church and state.

Our forefathers at the founding of our Constitutional Republic recognized that there were differing religious beliefs in America. Richard Henry Lee stated:

richard henry lee“It is true, we are not disposed to differ much, at present, about religion; but when we are making a constitution, it is to be hoped, for ages and millions yet unborn, why not establish the free exercise of religion, as a part of the national compact.”

Recognizing that there were differing beliefs they wanted to ensure that all had the Liberty to believe according to their conscience, not according to government mandate. John Leland, leader of The Virginia Baptist General Convention made this proclamation:

“Every man must give an account of himself to God, and therefore every man ought to be at liberty to serve God in that way that he can best reconcile it to his conscience. If government can answer for individuals at the day of judgment, let men be controlled by it in religious matters; otherwise let men be free.”

Simply saying that if God doesn’t strike you dead for not believing what He wants you to believe, government should never exercise a power greater than God chooses to exercise himself.

Yet, knowing all of that, our founders almost committed a major error in religious liberty. In 1784, several legislators put forward a bill “Establishing A Provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion.” James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, to name two, were vehemently opposed to the tax, as were the Baptist coalitions.

Thomas-Jefferson-9353715-1-402 james-madison-smallMadison was opposed to this bill “Because the Bill implies either that the Civil Magistrate is a competent Judge of Religious Truth; or that he may employ Religion as an engine of Civil policy. The first is an arrogant pretension falsified by the contradictory opinions of Rulers in all ages, and throughout the world: the second an unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation.”

Jefferson was also opposed, “That to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.”

Our framers believed that Liberty was a gift from God. They also believed that understanding was the only means to preserve Liberty. Thomas Jefferson said, “”God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?”

But they knew that government as a driving force for religion and religious education would bring the end of Liberty itself.

God or MammonThe Baptist Coalition made this statement: “That it is believed to be repugnant to the spirit of the gospel for the legislature thus to proceed in matters of religion and should the legislature assume the right of taxing the people for the support of the gospel it will be destructive to religious liberty.”

The framers knew that Religious Liberty required Christians to operate by faith, trusting God to be their provider and the the leader of the moral conscience. They did not support government supported education of religion because they KNEW that it would make government the ultimate determination of truth.

This is why Christians should not be begging government schools to teach religion and why Christians should not support vouchers to send kids to Christian schools. It is “arrogant pretension” an “unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation,” it is “sinful and tyrannical,” “repulsive to the spirit of the gospel” and “destructive to Liberty.”

RL VouchersChristians don’t need vouchers to send their kids to Christian schools. Christians have God who has promised to provide all their needs and God doesn’t need a government bail out. Vouchers are only a testimony of lack of faith not a provision for education. By the way, most State Constitutions require public school funding. So if you take a voucher then the State can tax you AGAIN to replace the money you took so the public schools have funding. What if Christians actually believed the Bible and God’s promise of provision? Maybe pastors don’t preach Matthew 6:24-30 anymore?

Why Public Schools Can’t Teach God:
Why Christians Should Never Accept Vouchers:

#Point2Ponder: Immorality of Spending

05112012_Congress_Spending_articleWhat is the definition of immoral or illegal? If Congress is actively trying to hide spending & violate the Constitution would that meet that definition?
How is it that we can continue to support anyone in the House or Senate when they are working so hard to circumvent the Constitution and destroy our Liberty?
Did you know that Congress has a “house rule” that allows for Congress to pass within the budget something called “changes in mandatory spending?” The entire concept of “mandatory spending” is wholly and completely unconstitutional. Budgets are supposed to expire so that spending will be reviewed.
spending bill memeLearn the Constitutional FACTS about the Budget HERE:
These “changes in mandatory spending” are called CHIMPS for short and they allow Congress, albeit illegally and unconstitutionally, to HIDE money from the taxpayers. CHIMPS mandate that the Treasury spend on certain things every year without Congressional approval. Since there is no Congressional approval necessary, Congress can’t stop the spending either, hence the term “mandatory.”
House and Senate GOP are right now trying to create CHIMPS in the sum of $40 billion dollars additional funding to the Pentagon. That means that the Treasury will be mandated to send the Pentagon an additional $40 billion dollars every year. This money will never be part of a budget again and never end. Hidden money, never accounted for again, and the theft continues with willful deceit.
federal spending chart memeSo here is the $40 billion question… Just how many CHIMPS are there and how much spending is being actively hidden from the people? What is the REAL deficit? This is so unconstitutional and so illegal, how can we ever trust any of them? Seriously?
By the way, the last time Congress actually had a budget was in 2009 and since then they have been using “continuing resolutions” to spend tax payer’s dollars all the while hiding billions (or is it trillions?) of dollars of spending from the people.

#Point2Ponder: Is Freedom of Press Free?

Today’s #Point2Ponder:

Screen-Shot-2013-11-02-at-8.39.11-AMNBC published an article calling Sheriff’s who defend the Constitution as “radical” and equated them with “domestic terrorists” and even implied they were just a bunch of racist white guys.

The headline reads: “Constitutional Sheriffs: The Cops Who Think the Government Is Our ‘Greatest Threat'”

Read the facts about this Sheriff:

Now Read the article by NBC:

I find that quite ironic. Why would a member of the press be mocking anyone for thinking that the “Government is our ‘greatest threat’?” The press relies on the very principles of Liberty for their industry and livelihood. Is there a greater threat Freedom of Press than government? Is there any OTHER threat to Freedom of Press than government?


Benjamin Franklin, writing as Silence Dogood, believed there was no greater threat to Freedom of Speech than the government.

From the Massachusetts Historical Society. Not to be reproduced without permission.

“Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech; which is the Right of every Man, as far as by it, he does not hurt or controul the Right of another: And this is the only Check it ought to suffer, and the only Bounds it ought to know.

This sacred Privilege is so essential to free Goverments, that the Security of Property, and the Freedom of Speech always go together; and in those wretched Countries where a Man cannot call his Tongue his own, he can scarce call any Thing else his own. Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech; a Thing terrible to Publick Traytors.” Benjamin Franklin, Silence Dogood, No. 8 Jul 9, 1722.

How ironic is it that NBC, or any #MSM, would assert that defending the #Constitution makes you a potential domestic terrorist. Has our media become so ignorant that they do not understand that their industry is dependent upon a limited government that recognizes the superiority of the Rights of the people? Has our media become so fearful of government that they no longer have independent thought? If so, then as Franklin predicted, Freedom of Speech is suppressed, public Liberty is oppressed, and Wisdom is dead.

speech1300x300The very sad thing is that history proves the fact that government is the only enemy to freedom of press. It is how the communist revolution took hold of the people. Look at Joseph Goebbels, and his Ministry of Truth. Even Franklin ties the tyranny of Charles I to the denial of freedom of speech and George III had control of the media when our founders were trying to encourage the American Colonists to stand for Liberty.

Ignorance is not bliss…it is slavery. How can the media be so blind to history and to reality that they would allow this vicious pied piper to lead them right off the cliff into government mandated silence?

Why should we care?  If we do not have freedom of press, can we maintain freedom of speech?  If we do not have freedom of press, can we actually peacefully assemble or petition for a redress of grievances?  If the government takes complete control of the press with the permission of media, will any Liberty be secure?  Remember Franklin warned, “This sacred Privilege is so essential to free Goverments, that the Security of Property, and the Freedom of Speech always go together; and in those wretched Countries where a Man cannot call his Tongue his own, he can scarce call any Thing else his own.”  Liberty Does Really Matter.

“For no People will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when Knowledge is diffusd and Virtue is preservd. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauchd in their Manners, they will sink under their own Weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.” Samuel Adams to James Warren 1775

#Point2Ponder | The Difficulty With Guns


Of all the things I teach there are 2 things that are always most challenging from the true Liberty perspective; guns and religion.

Go here for #Free #2A flyer:

You might think, teaching as I do to the audiences that I teach, that those two topics would be the most enthusiastically received.  However, when these topics are addressed from the true Liberty perspective it can be difficult to accept given the way Americans have been conditioned to think.

Guns, even in conservative circles, are controversial. According to our founders (Richard Henry Lee for one) we are supposed always carry a firearm (emphasis on always).  In Lee’s perspective, if you are not armed you are not defending Liberty.  But even more challenging than that, Lee said that we should also be training our children at a young age on how to use guns.  He called these two activities, “essential to the preservation of Liberty.”

Most red blooded patriots would have no problem with those perspectives so what’s the problem?  Actually DOING them.  Ideologies are just rhetoric until you put them to use.  We like to talk big, but the doing comes hard.  (Perhaps that’s why some politicians are so popular?)

How many conservative Americans carry ALWAYS?  How many conservative Americans train their kids to carry ALWAYS?  How many conservative Americans would feel uncomfortable doing either of those things.  Yet, according to the standards of Liberty, we should be doing them as reflex, without even a second thought.

Here is an even more challenging aspect of guns and Liberty; according to Noah Webster, the American people should always out arm their government.  Yes, according to Noah, if the government owns one, we should own two.  How many Americans would be comfortable with the though that every day citizens should posses MRAPs, drones, tanks, or even WMDs?  Not many considering that they don’t even want us to have handgun shaped PopTarts.  Now think about that fact that when we have them, we are also supposed to be training our kids how to use them.  MIND BLOWN.

Here is the thought running through some minds right now, “KrisAnne, you can’t possibly think that everyday people should have access to nuclear weapons?!?”  My response?  I have a sneaky suspicion that if government knew people could own them they wouldn’t be so quick to make them.

Here is a shocker…everyday people DO own them.  We just call them by political names.  And if you wouldn’t want Timothy next door to own one, why does that opinion all of the sudden change when we elect Timothy to office and pay him with a government paycheck?  With a true Liberty perspective, we should be thinking the exact opposite.  Timothy can have one, but when he is elected to office, we need to take it away from him.

Don’t forget your free #2A info!