Get Informed - Get Equipped - Get Inspired

"No people will tamely surrender their Liberties...
when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved"
- Sam Adams

PayPalDonateNow

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

 

Art Christmas

Want To Know The Hope Of America's Founders?

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

 

Listening to the news, watching the headlines has become a requirement for my current ministry. But I have come to realize that a daily diet of this is hazardous to my health. This never ending caustic supply of drama and crisis is not healthy for the body or the soul. IT makes me want to cry out, “Peace on Earth? Good will toward men? Where is it!”

There have been many in this battle for Liberty who have succumbed to the overwhelming negativity of the media invented reality, leaving behind the battle to search for the “normal life.” We must guard against this intrusion and obstruction to the defense of Liberty. I am convinced the ever-continuing crisis after crisis is purposed to dishearten the patriot and discourage the fight. So what is the solution? We must learn to find our hope and center ourselves on the true reality, not the one contrived by those receiving their marching orders from Alinsky, Cloward and Piven. We must know that just as we have inherited the Liberty we enjoy, we have also inherited the enemies of Liberty. We must pick up the mantle of those that came before us and learn from their courage and resolve. Will we be sunshine patriots or true victors of Liberty?

Our history is rich with men and women who have surrendered all so that many could have the greatest nation the world has ever known.  On December 23, 1776 Thomas Paine penned these words:

“THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.

Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.

What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.”

December 25, 1776 George Washington led those who stood by Liberty across the Delaware in a logistically challenging and very dangerous operation that resulted in a victory over the Hessians.   It the midst of a battle not only for their lives but for the Liberty of generations to come, those who forged this new Constitutional Republic KNEW there was a cause worth fighting for and worth every sacrifice.  What could possible drive a people to stand in the midst of great dangers and admittedly  against insurmountable odds?  In 1765 John Adams wrote:

“Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.”

For over 700 years before the Declaration of Independence, men and women were learning the lessons that would be taught to our founders. Lessons that would infuse our founders with a courage and a hope that would build the greatest nation in the world. Patrick Henry said, “I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know no way to judge the future but by the past.” He was letting us know that his knowledge of those last 700 years, were the very reason he knew how this fight would turn out. He knew that every time men and women understood the value of Liberty and pledged all to protect it, they were always victorious. These guarantees of history must have raced through Henry’s head; 1100 Charter of Liberties, Magna Carta, 1628 Petition of Right, 1641 Grand Remonstrance, and his very own Bill of Rights of 1689. These were battles fought in the name of Liberty and he knew that victory was a guarantee. This is our history. This is our guarantee. This is our victory!

Did these brave men and women live without fear? Hardly so! Mercy Otis Warren articulated this dilemma so well.

“I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that rise before us, there is no receding; May nothing ever check that glorious spirit if 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.”

They knew that bravery was not the absence of fear, but doing what you must in the face of fear. They knew that the battle for Liberty, as Mercy called it, was a righteous cause. Knowing the source of her courage is the key to understanding her resolve. In a letter to her friend Mrs. Macauley, in 1774, lies the key to the source of her strength. She said 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.”

You see, the battle for Liberty is a battle for the gifts of God. 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? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that is justice cannot sleep forever.”

For Patrick Henry, courage not only came from knowing the history that “guided his feet” or fighting with the “vigilant, active, and the brave,” but also knowing they served a “just God who presides over the destinies of nations” and when standing for Liberty, a gift from God, they could not fail.

He declared,

“We are three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.”

The key to victory, the key to the courage that brings victory is not simply fighting the fight, but KNOWING we fight a righteous battle for the One who gave us that Liberty. Our founders were in a position to pledge their lives, the lives of their families, everything that they had because they were firmly rooted in ALL the assurances of Liberty. Our founders knew that Liberty is a gift from God, and those that stand for God’s gifts will be victorious through God’s promises. They firmly believed that living in tyranny was worse than dying for Liberty. They knew that through their faith in Christ, their rewards in standing for God’s gift would be certain, whether on the battle field or in Heaven.

As Thomas Paine so eloquently put it, “THESE are the times that try men’s souls.” But Paine’s full statement gives a richness that is lost with the initial quote alone. Payne gives US a wisdom to tell us who will last in this battle and WHY they will last.

“...yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing (sic) its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.

If we wish to have the resolve that Mercy Otis-Warren spoke of, the confidence that Patrick Henry displayed, we must KNOW what Thomas Jefferson knew so we will not become the sunshine patriots Thomas Paine condemns. We must know Liberty is a gift from God, this Gift, although comes at a high price, is worth fighting for because God is with us. If God be with us, who can be against us?

This is not yet the darkest hour experienced by our nation by far. We still live in the greatest nation in the world. A nation built upon the principles of Liberty. The principles that cry all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. A nation where all men have equal opportunity to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. No other nation can make that claim. No other people have that birth right. But with that gift comes great responsibility to secure that Liberty for generations to come. We cannot lose hope. We cannot let Liberty slip. Because, it is not our hope, it is not our Liberty, it is the hope and Liberty of ages and millions yet unborn. We must reacquaint ourselves with the lamp of experience that gives us the courage to see a guaranteed victory. But we must also reacquaint ourselves with the Giver of that gift of Liberty and the provider of the hope of victory.

In one of the darkest moments of our history, a story is told of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Henry’s wife had been tragically and fatally burned in June of 1861. Henry, himself, was badly burned trying to put out the fire that consumed his beloved wife. He was so consumed by grief over the loss of his wife, at Christmas he wrote in his journal, “How inexpressibly sad are all holidays.” One year later, Henry wrote, “A merry Christmas’ say the children, but that is no more for me.” That following year, Henry learns that his oldest son was severely wounded in the Civil War after a bullet passed under his should blades damaging his spine. His journal was blank on Christmas on 1864. However, on Christmas day, 1865, Henry penned the words to “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day”. During one of the darkest times our nation has ever known, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow found his hope;

“I heard the bells on Christmas Day

Their old familiar carols play,

And wild and sweet

The words repeat

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

 

And thought how, as the day had come,

The belfries of all Christendom

Had rolled along

The unbroken song

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

 

And in despair I bowed my head;

“There is no peace on earth,” I said;

“For hate is strong,

And mocks the song

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!”

 

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:

“God is not dead; nor doth he sleep!

The Wrong shall fail,

The Right prevail,

With peace on earth, good-will to men!”

Henry awoke from his despair and realized that God is not dead and is still the Giver of peace and hope. He knew that God promises victory to those who trust in Christ and will stand for God’s gifts. He was able to express that hope in the phrase, 

“God is not dead; nor does he sleep! The Wrong shall fail; the Right prevail, With peace on earth, good-will to men!” 

That same promise belongs to us, the greatest nation this world has ever known. We simply must place our trust in the right place. My hope is not in Congress. My hope is not in any man or his government. In this holy season, let us not forget that through the shed blood of Christ, whether the victory is on the battle field or through the gates of Heaven, we are winners either way. 

This is the REAL HOPE; a hope that has changed the world

MERRY CHRISTMAS from KrisAnneHall.com

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

 

Art erase impeach

Correcting Unconstitutional Impeachment

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

 

Current events always bring about the most powerful teaching moments.  Today’s question can be generally formed as:

“What is the remedy when articles of impeachment are established that do not comply with the terms of the Constitution?” 

Those who ratified our Constitution knew that those in government would always be tempted, for reasons they would attempt to justify, to try to work outside the boundaries of the Constitution.  James Madison, “Father of the Constitution” and our fourth President even called our Constitution a “parchment barrier,” knowing that the document itself would have no force to keep the politically ambitious within the Constitution’s limited and defined boundaries.  It was always considered, and will always be the duty of the citizens to control those they place in government.

The Constitution lays out very specific terms for impeachment in Article 2 section 4 of the Constitution.  According to the Constitution impeachment can only be brought for four specific crimes: Bribery, Treason, High Crimes, or Misdemeanors.  Any article of impeachment that is outside those four crimes is completely unconstitutional.  So what can the people do, Constitutionally, when articles of impeachment are brought by the House outside those four authorized terms?

Understanding the constitutional solution to this political problem requires understanding that the structure of government created by the Constitution is not the structure of government we currently have operating outside the Constitution.  When those holding the trust of public office leave behind the standard of the Constitution, the people have a duty to correct their course.  When the power to impeach is exercised to satisfy political lusts rather than comply with Constitutional standards, what is the solution that exists within the established constitutional framework?

The first thing we must remind ourselves is, the people didn't elect the president.  The office of the president was not created to be a representative of the people; the president was created to be an ambassador for the States in foreign affairs.  For that reason, the States elect the president through the electoral college.  This is not a bad thing.  As a matter of fact, the electoral college was established for specific reasons; first and foremost to protect the liberty and authority of the people.  (If this principle seems strange to you, please read what those who drafted the Constitution said about the Electoral College: http://bit.ly/ElectoralCollegeTruth)

With that first principle in mind, here is the solution to the question: what is the check and balance upon unconstitutional articles of impeachment:

  1. Because the president is a representative of the States, elected by the States, an improper impeachment is a disenfranchisement of the States.
  2. Since it is the States' vote that is being overturned, the remedy exists in the States.  It is the obligation of every State Governor and Legislator to bring a lawsuit against the enforcement of the articles of impeachment and the members of Congress violating the specific terms of impeachment.
  3. Because the purpose of the Senate is to represent the States in federal government, it is also imperative that those Senators representing States who chose the President, absent proper ground for impeachment, must not only oppose the House articles of impeachment, they must vote against conviction. 

As a final note if truth, the Senators are representatives of their State as a whole, not the people of their State and not themselves.  So if the State selected the president and if true grounds for impeachment are absent, a Senator MUST oppose the impeachment regardless of personal opinions and the opinions of a portion of the people of the State.

The designers of our Constitution crafted that document to be simply written so that the average person in 1788 could read and understand how their government was required to operate.  The designed the solutions to be simply but necessarily applied by the people

“If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.” Federalist #33

However, because the American education system no longer teaches the essential principles driving the proper application of our Constitution, the remedies often evade our view and the people slip into overwhelming frustrations due to a perceived lack of options.  As Thomas Jefferson remarked in a letter to Charles Yancy in 1816:

“…if a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was & never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty & property of their constituents. there is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information.”

Those who designed and ratified our Constitution gave us very powerful options, we simply need to apply those options to make the necessary course corrections.  Application must begin with proper education.  With this understanding, now we can demand our Governors and State Legislators exercise their duty in authority to be a necessary check and balance upon an unauthorized and unconstitutional behavior of those in the federal government.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

 

Art House Impeah

The Constitutionally & Historically Established House Procedures For Articles of Impeachment

By KrisAnne Hall, JD

 

The deceivers in Congress and MSM want you to believe that the Constitution is "vague" on House procedures for bringing articles of impeachment.  That is only because they WANT to evade the Constitution and have the authority to act arbitrarily to deny their obligations to the Constitution and due process.  Understanding how the House is supposed to proceed in the filing of impeachment is really not that complicated, the deceivers just want you to think it is.  So, as briefly and plainly as possible, here is how it is supposed to work....

If we work backwards it is the easiest way to logically understand the proper procedure for the House to file Articles of Impeachment. 

1.  We know from those who ratified the Constitution, our most relevant source, that the Senate is the "court" that will "try" the impeachment.  (Read Federalist 65 and http://bit.ly/FoundersImpeachment)

2.  We know from Article 2 section 4 of the Constitution (the Supreme Law of the Land) that impeachment is valid for the crimes of Treason, Bribery, High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

              A.  Article 1 section 3 clause 7 of the Constitution states that after impeachment the convicted can no longer hold public office AND can be tried in a criminal court for the SAME crime and held accountable under the law.

              B.  All four of the grounds for impeachment are actually CRIMES, subject to the terms criminal prosecution.  Alexander Hamilton discusses this in Federalist 65 when he explains why the Senate and not the Supreme Court is the proper body to try impeachments:

“Who would be willing to stake his life and his estate upon the verdict of a jury, acting under the auspices of Judges, who had predetermined his guilt?”

Hamilton says since the accused can be tried in a criminal court for the same crimes that brought about impeachment, it would be inappropriate for the Supreme Court to handle impeachment and also have the possibility of having the criminal case come before them as well.  With that being said, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will still preside over the impeachment trial to ensure the proper rules of due process are followed by the Senate. (See Federalist 65)

3.  In Federalist 65, Hamilton calls the Senate the COURT and speaks of the proceeding as a TRIAL and even indicates that the same process will be followed by the lower courts when trying the accused outside of impeachment.  Hamilton even explicitly states that the proper conduct for the Senate is to judge the accused by the “real demonstration of guilt or innocence,” once again using the legal vernacular appropriate of a true trial of justice.

4.  Since the accused (president, vice president, or any civil officer) will be having a legitimate trial in the Senate, with all due process considerations of a court of justice, it will only be fitting to describe the role of the House as the “prosecutor” who reviews the allegations and the evidence and has the responsibility of filing the charges against the accused.

A prosecutor (I know, I was one for nearly a decade) does not file every allegation that comes along.  A prosecutor does not even file a case against every person “believed” to be guilty of a crime.  The belief of guilt is irrelevant in the criminal justice system.  The only thing that matters in a true court of justice, is what can be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” in the framework of the statutory crime, the evidence admissible, and the rules of due process.

5.  Since the Senate is the Trial phase and the House is the filing stage, the House procedure for filing impeachment will logically be the same as that of a prosecutor. 

A.  The House members must look at the allegations.  They must then look at that law and determine if the allegations fit the law.  The Constitution establishes the law and that impeachment can only be brought for Treason, Bribery, High Crimes, or Misdemeanors.  If the allegations do not fit into one of those four categories, then the House, just like any good prosecutor, must refuse to file impeachment.  If you are confused by the current assertion that the Constitution permits the House to bring impeachment for “political” reasons, please read this article to help you understand why that reasoning is false: http://bit.ly/FoundersImpeachment

B.  If the allegations fit into one of the four categories of impeachable crimes, then the House members must review the evidence and determine 1. if the evidence is admissible, 2.  if the admissible evidence satisfies the elements of the crime, and 3. if the relevant evidence is sufficient to prove guilt.  If the answer to any of these questions is “no” then the House must refuse to file impeachment.  If the answer to all these questions is “yes” then the House must file impeachment and put together the case for trial in the Senate.

That’s it.  That is the procedure for the House of Representatives for bringing articles of impeachment according to the intent of the founders and the Constitution.  Perhaps it seems very simple to me because this is the process I engaged in every day of my life for nearly a decade.  I was even blessed enough to train new prosecutors in this process.  The presence of due process in America is such a precious jewel and as not only a prosecutor, but one who trained future prosecutors, my philosophy was never “win at all costs” but to consider the lives of the people, both victims and accused, stay within the lanes of the law, and above of all preserve the Rights of the people involved so that the system doesn’t become a tool for vengeance and destruction. 

Our House members should hold the procedure of impeachment with the same reverence and respect.  The fact that every civil officer in our Constitutional Republic can only be impeached from office through the respect of law and due process is priceless and ought to be seen as invaluable.  It is truly one of the things that separates our Constitutional Republic from an arbitrary and lawless Banana Republic.

The thing I find interesting is that many of these House members are lawyers and many of the lawyers have trial court experience.  For these people to claim that they are “confused” as to this procedure seems very disingenuous and self-serving.  If American prosecutors handled cases the way the House Judiciary Committee is handling this impeachment, their cases would be thrown out of court, they would likely be looking at sanctions from the BAR Association, and could even face their own criminal trial for the crime of “vindictive prosecution.”  Perhaps one lesson our House members would do well to learn, the first lesson I taught all my prosecutors in training, we are “prosecutors” not “persecutors” and we must know the difference.  

It should be very important to every American that our House does not engage in vindictive prosecution and is diligent to the rights of due process.  What these people in high office are allowed to do to the president, or any other civil officer for that matter, will not only set a legal precedent but also a cultural one that will put the due process and fundamental rights of every American at peril.  I will close with the words of Hannah Winthrop, one of the founders of America: “How often do we see people blind to their own interests precipitately maddening on to their own destruction!”

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Art Fed 65

Hamilton Silences Impeachment Fools

By KrisAnne Hall, JD

America’s media stream has been saturated by politicians, pundits, and law professors pontificating on what America’s founders’ believed about presidential impeachment.  The most oft used argument today is a misapplication and misleading representation of what founder Alexander Hamilton said in Federalist #65.  The claim is that Alexander Hamilton establishes in Federalist #65 that presidents should be “impeached for political reasons.  This is completely and obviously false to anyone who has read the essay and possesses a smidgen of reading comprehension skills.  I believe the people asserting this fake claim are confident that the American people won’t actually read this essay and call them out for their deceptions.  My goal is to show how simple and plainly written this text is and how blatantly deceptive these people are in their lie-driven agenda. (You can read Fed 65 here http://bit.ly/Fed65)

The overall assertion of these prevaricators is that Hamilton uses Federalist #65 to explain to the people what the Constitution says about the grounds for impeachment of presidents.  The very title of this document declares this to be false.  The document is titled, “The Powers of the Senate Continued.”  As the Federalist Papers are compiled by a series of topics, Federalist #65 falls in the set of essays explaining the powers delegated to the Senate.  What is interesting, in the very first paragraph Hamilton explains that this essay is NOT about the president, but the Senate, and a presidential series would be forthcoming.

“As in the business of appointments the executive will be the principal agent, the provisions relating to it will most properly be discussed in the examination of that department.”

The second paragraph of this essay is the fertile ground used to harvest the agenda-driven propaganda of this present hour.  It is in this paragraph that we glean our best understanding of what Hamilton believed to be the greatest complications to a valid impeachment.  What Hamilton does NOT do in this paragraph, or in any paragraph in this essay, is define the terms of impeachment nor the unlimited power of the House to impeach a president for whatever allegation the majority can motivate their moiling mob to support.  What is interesting is, that Hamilton actually defeats that claim in the very paragraph these fabulists violently plunder.

Hamilton begins paragraph two by explaining that history proves it will be very difficult to pull together a fit body for the trying of impeachment.  Once you read Hamilton’s argument, not only does his logic become very clear, but it also shows itself to be very familiar in the present day impeachment display.  The reason it will be difficult to pull together a fit body for impeachment, Hamilton explains, is because impeachment is a process that involves people who are solely contained in the realm of politics and politics are ruled by emotions and not reason.

“The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

These tricksters claim that because Hamilton used the word “political” he must have meant that political reasoning was sufficient for impeachment; i.e. if the majority in the House doesn’t like a president’s policies, mannerisms, or politics then impeachment is the solution.  However, Hamilton’s use of the term “political” is descriptive of the universe in which impeachment exists, not of the terms upon which impeachment may take place.  Because impeachment is applied to elected people who are tried for crimes that violate a position given by the entire society as opposed to a single person and the accused is tried by politicians it is properly classified as political.  It seems that politicians, pundits, and professors may be better at cherry picking than George Washington.

If that was all Hamilton said on the topic, a matter of interpretation could be claimed.  However, what Hamilton says after this statement makes all the difference in the world.

“The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused.”

Because politicians are the accused in impeachment and because they are tried by politicians, it will be difficult to put together an unbiased body to impeach, and because politics are products of division people and politicians will naturally take sides. 

Watch out, listen up, Hamilton is going to give us a bold warning of what will go wrong when impeachment is used for political punishments instead of strictly holding to the terms of impeachment outlined in Article 2 section 4.

“In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.

Because politicians are always the products of elections where one person wins and one person loses, there will always be one group of people unhappy with the other.  Hamilton considered it to be dangerous for impeachment to become a tool used to punish people for political reasons.  So when members of Congress, political pundits, or partisan professors claim that the Constitution supports using the institution for impeachment as a political punishment, they are not only wrong but aiding and abetting the “greatest danger” to the political system; they create impeachments not concerned with due process, not concerned with crimes, their elements, reliable evidence, or truth and qualified witnesses.  Under the propagandists presumed terms, guilt or innocence is not the standard as established by the founders, but the standard becomes whether you like an elected official or not.

It is here that I am reminded of a story in history where a man named Haman built gallows to hang his political enemy Mordechai.  To eliminate Mordechai as his competitor for the King’s affections, Haman attempted to sow a series of lies against Mordechai.  The King, upon discovering the truth, ordered Haman to be hung on his own gallows.  Article 2 section 4 of the Constitution is not written solely for the impeachment of presidents.  The text reads, “president, vice president, and all civil officers.”  That term “civil officers” includes every single person employed in federal government whether elected or hired by an elected person.  These political fornicators ought to be careful the standards they create, for what is good for the goose is good for the Haman.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

art heritage thanks

A Heritage Worthy of Thanksgiving

 

by KrisAnne Hall

 

As we reflect on the past year in America, let us not forget that Liberty is a gift that was purchased for us with great sacrifice. Among the many things we have to be thankful for, we must be eternally grateful for the wisdom of men and women that understood that Liberty was a gift from God and that all God’s gifts are worth our every sacrifice.  John Adams, in a letter to Abigail in 1777 expressed this sacrifice.

Posterity ! you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good use of it If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it.

We must honor this sacrifice by honoring their memory and continuing their efforts.  Too often I see the revisionism of our history in an effort to demean these men and women with the purpose of destroying our nation.  We do not properly respect their efforts by allowing these lies to be taught to our sons and daughters.  We must teach the truth.  We owe it to them.  We owe it to our children.

I am not trying to give the founders some divine status or even suppose them a level of perfection that they did not have. We must understand that our nation was not founded upon people, but upon principles. The people that gave us our exceptional American principles were flawed vessels just like you and me. However, the really amazing part of this history is that flawed men understood that the foundation of an enduring nation must be liberty moored in morality. Consider these words by Alexander Hamilton:

Equal pains have been taken to deprave the morals as to extinguish the religion of the country [France], if indeed morality in a community can be separated from religion…The pious and moral weep over these scenes as a sepulcher destined to entomb all they revere and esteem.

The politician who loves liberty sees them with regret as a gulf that may swallow up the liberty to which he is devoted. He knows that morality overthrown (and morality must fall with religion), the terrors of despotism can alone curb the impetuous passions of man, and confine him within the bounds of social duty. (emphasis original)
The Stand, No. III (April 7, 1798)

Our founders knew that Liberty is a combination of two equally important parts – it is FREEDOM under the constraints of MORAL LAW. Liberty cannot survive where there is pure freedom. Pure freedom gives man the right to do whatever is right in his own mind: cheat, lie, rob, murder. Pure freedom is lawlessness. At the same time, Liberty cannot survive with moral law alone. Moral law not mingled with freedom is theocracy. Theocracy in the hands of men is tyranny in the name of religion. Our founders attempted give us this balance and secure the blessings of liberty for us in our founding documents. When we abandon our founding documents and disregard our moral foundations, liberty is in peril.

Thomas Jefferson gave us this warning, “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 a gift from God?”

While Benjamin Franklin warned America’s founders directly:

“In the beginning of the Contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for Divine protection…. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of Superintending Providence in our favor…have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?…. 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?”

Patrick Henry said “Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.”

As an exceptional nation built upon exceptional principles, we cannot deny that we are built with a foundational understanding of an exceptional God. Thomas Jefferson reminds us that, “We are not in a world ungoverned by the laws and the power of a Superior Agent. Our efforts are in His hand, and directed by it; and He will give them their effect in His own time.”

Because of our historical understanding that our nation was built on the principles of freedom and morality, America has always been the haven of rest when tyrants oppress their own. She is the vineyard of innovation and opportunity. This is the nation that opens its arms to the tired, to the poor, to the oppressed, to the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. No other nation can claim this legacy, no other people has this birthright. This is the shining city upon a hill, and we cannot hide our light under a bush.

The focus of our education should not be on the flaws of the men who gave us this nation, but on the exceptional nation that they gave us. We have an exceptional nation where “all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.” A nation birthed by the principle that the power of the government is to be held BY the people and not where the government holds power OVER the people. A nation that believes the principle that says all are free to worship according to the dictates of their conscience, and all are equally free, “Jews, Turks, pagans, AND Christians.” A nation that has prospered based on the principle that ideas and hard work open the door to prosperity regardless of bloodline, skin color or social status. A nation that has remained free based on the principle that liberties remain secure by maintaining the right to defend self, property, and Liberty.

In the profound words of Daniel Webster, “Is our Constitution worth preserving? Guard it as you would guard the seat of your life, guard it not only against the open blows of violence, but also against that spirit of change…Miracles do not cluster. That which has happened but once in six thousand years, cannot be expected to happen often. Such a government, once destroyed, would have a void to be filled, perhaps for centuries, with evolution and tumult, riot and despotism.”~ An Anniversary Address by Daniel Webster July 4th 1806

So in this time of Thanksgiving, let us maintain a true focus on what is important. In this day it is so popular to denigrate America for every little flaw. Why not take back a bit of American Exceptionalism? Why not embrace what makes us different from every other nation on the globe? America is an exceptional place because we are built on exceptional principles. Principles of Liberty, freedom, morality, and equality as derived from our Creator.  And these principles are STILL WORTH FIGHTING FOR!

Happy Thanksgiving America! May God continue to bless this exceptional nation.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter