by Jerry Salcido, CampaignForLiberty.com
Anyone who has worked in support of the liberty movement knows an unfortunate truth: it is all too often associated, rightly or wrongly, with "conspiracy theories" -- those all too often unsubstantiated, speculative viewpoints on various topics such as the assassination of JFK, the attempted assassination of Reagan, 9/11, the role of the Rockefellers and Rothschilds in modern world history, and the current doings of the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, and the Council on Foreign Relations. The problem is that liberty's enemies are very aware of this association as well and they use it to their advantage. Too often freedom's detractors slander the liberty movement as being filled with conspiracy nuts and other wackos.
But you know what? In this regard, the dissidents have a point. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Saturday, December 26, 2009
"What Is The U.S. Constitution?"
by Timothy Baldwin, TenthAmendmentCenter.com.
After my latest article, Our Dead Constitution, was released, I received much response, many from those who understood and agreed, and some by those who were opposed to my statement, “Our constitution is dead.” This leads me to reasonably believe that many of us need to be educated about what a constitution actually is before constitutional law and freedom can be restored throughout the states.
1. A constitution does not create freedom. A constitution is created only to protect and secure freedom which already exists, through forms, structure and limitations of government. This is what our founders said in the Declaration of Independence: “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Therefore, if one’s perspective about the U.S. Constitution is that it statically creates freedom for all the people of the states, then I could understand how he would be shocked or angered at the suggestion that the U.S. Constitution is dead. To the contrary, we know that freedom exists in a state of nature, created by God, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
After my latest article, Our Dead Constitution, was released, I received much response, many from those who understood and agreed, and some by those who were opposed to my statement, “Our constitution is dead.” This leads me to reasonably believe that many of us need to be educated about what a constitution actually is before constitutional law and freedom can be restored throughout the states.
1. A constitution does not create freedom. A constitution is created only to protect and secure freedom which already exists, through forms, structure and limitations of government. This is what our founders said in the Declaration of Independence: “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Therefore, if one’s perspective about the U.S. Constitution is that it statically creates freedom for all the people of the states, then I could understand how he would be shocked or angered at the suggestion that the U.S. Constitution is dead. To the contrary, we know that freedom exists in a state of nature, created by God, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
"Secession, the Second Amendment and Sun Tzu"
by Russell D. Longcore, DumpDC.com.
In the 6th Century BC, Chinese warrior Sun Tzu wrote “The Art of War.” It has been the definitive treatise on waging war for 26 centuries now. Only thirteen chapters, it was translated first in 1782 when a French Jesuit priest living in China, Joseph Amiot, acquired a copy of it, and translated it into French. Subsequent translations have honed the text into English...
...The general concept that I want you to take away from these verses is that in order to win many battles, you must keep your enemy off balance, deceived and confused about your strategies and tactics. If you can attack him at many weak points, he will have to respond, and therefore, you control both the location and the tempo of the battle. This will be important in the thoughts and questions below.
I’ve been writing lately about secession and the well-regulated militia, and how they should be inextricably tied to one another. From the reactions I’m receiving from readers, this concept seems to be somewhat new to them.
Specifically, I and other writers have referred to the truest meaning of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states: “A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
In the 6th Century BC, Chinese warrior Sun Tzu wrote “The Art of War.” It has been the definitive treatise on waging war for 26 centuries now. Only thirteen chapters, it was translated first in 1782 when a French Jesuit priest living in China, Joseph Amiot, acquired a copy of it, and translated it into French. Subsequent translations have honed the text into English...
...The general concept that I want you to take away from these verses is that in order to win many battles, you must keep your enemy off balance, deceived and confused about your strategies and tactics. If you can attack him at many weak points, he will have to respond, and therefore, you control both the location and the tempo of the battle. This will be important in the thoughts and questions below.
I’ve been writing lately about secession and the well-regulated militia, and how they should be inextricably tied to one another. From the reactions I’m receiving from readers, this concept seems to be somewhat new to them.
Specifically, I and other writers have referred to the truest meaning of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states: “A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
Friday, December 25, 2009
LBCCS Christmas Message
We at the Liberty Bell Center for Constitutional Studies would like to wish you all a very merry Christmas! As we continue in our pursuit of knowledge and liberty, may we always remember the Word that became flesh two thousand years ago and the true liberty that can only be found through Him.
Blessings to you all on this wonderful day,
Ryan Burgett
Chairman - L.B.C.C.S.
Blessings to you all on this wonderful day,
Ryan Burgett
Chairman - L.B.C.C.S.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
I Am a Classical Liberal
A friend asked me why I call myself a "Classical Liberal" rather than a "Reagan Conservative."
So I went ahead and explained to him in a nutshell what I meant:
Let me put it this way. When I hear "Reagan Conservative" I instantly think of massive, overbearing, intrusive government with a great big American flag plastered over the front of it. That is NOT me.
I am a classical liberal in the tradition of John Locke, many of our founding fathers (Thomas Jefferson in particular), Frédéric Bastiat and Ron Paul. A classical liberal believes in the God-given natural rights of human beings to life, liberty and property; and understands that the purpose of government is to protect those rights to the extent that we as individuals can not efficiently do it ourselves. Crime is the forceful violation of another person's rights and the only legitimate circumstance to deprive a person of any of their rights is in response to their unlawful deprivation of another person's rights. And in all cases, the punishment should match the offense plus with extra compensation to the victim. It is a very simple philosophy that leaves no room for large, overbearing government. And it is a philosophy right in line with our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. It is worth pointing out that the Constitution only delegates 18 powers/responsibilities to Congress, then the Executive branch has the responsibility of faithfully executing those laws and the Judicial branch is supposed to watch and make sure all legislation fits within the confines of the Constitution and Natural Law. Very simple. If our federal government stuck to the Constitutional formula, it would be extremely small, in fact significantly smaller than any State government. Can you imagine that?!?! Oh, how far we have fallen!
In summary, as a classical liberal, I stand uncompromising in support of "the laws of nature and nature's God."
So I went ahead and explained to him in a nutshell what I meant:
Let me put it this way. When I hear "Reagan Conservative" I instantly think of massive, overbearing, intrusive government with a great big American flag plastered over the front of it. That is NOT me.
I am a classical liberal in the tradition of John Locke, many of our founding fathers (Thomas Jefferson in particular), Frédéric Bastiat and Ron Paul. A classical liberal believes in the God-given natural rights of human beings to life, liberty and property; and understands that the purpose of government is to protect those rights to the extent that we as individuals can not efficiently do it ourselves. Crime is the forceful violation of another person's rights and the only legitimate circumstance to deprive a person of any of their rights is in response to their unlawful deprivation of another person's rights. And in all cases, the punishment should match the offense plus with extra compensation to the victim. It is a very simple philosophy that leaves no room for large, overbearing government. And it is a philosophy right in line with our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. It is worth pointing out that the Constitution only delegates 18 powers/responsibilities to Congress, then the Executive branch has the responsibility of faithfully executing those laws and the Judicial branch is supposed to watch and make sure all legislation fits within the confines of the Constitution and Natural Law. Very simple. If our federal government stuck to the Constitutional formula, it would be extremely small, in fact significantly smaller than any State government. Can you imagine that?!?! Oh, how far we have fallen!
In summary, as a classical liberal, I stand uncompromising in support of "the laws of nature and nature's God."
Monday, December 21, 2009
"What Is a Right?
By Andrew Napolitano, CampaignForLiberty.com.
". . . .What is a right? A right is a gift from God that extends from our humanity. Thinkers from St. Thomas Aquinas, to Thomas Jefferson, to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to Pope John Paul II have all argued that our rights are a natural part of our humanity. We own our bodies, thus we own the gifts that emanate from our bodies. So, our right to life, our right to develop our personalities, our right to think as we wish, to say what we think, to publish what we say, our right to worship or not worship, our right to travel, to defend ourselves, to use our own property as we see fit, our right to due process -- fairness -- from the government, and our right to be left alone, are all rights that stem from our humanity. These are natural rights that we are born with. The government doesn't give them to us and the government doesn't pay for them and the government can't take them away, unless a jury finds that we have violated someone else's rights. . . ."
To read the entire article, click here.
". . . .What is a right? A right is a gift from God that extends from our humanity. Thinkers from St. Thomas Aquinas, to Thomas Jefferson, to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to Pope John Paul II have all argued that our rights are a natural part of our humanity. We own our bodies, thus we own the gifts that emanate from our bodies. So, our right to life, our right to develop our personalities, our right to think as we wish, to say what we think, to publish what we say, our right to worship or not worship, our right to travel, to defend ourselves, to use our own property as we see fit, our right to due process -- fairness -- from the government, and our right to be left alone, are all rights that stem from our humanity. These are natural rights that we are born with. The government doesn't give them to us and the government doesn't pay for them and the government can't take them away, unless a jury finds that we have violated someone else's rights. . . ."
To read the entire article, click here.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Benjamin Franklin Quote
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
"The Progressive Era"
By William Anderson, CampaignForLiberty.com.
One of the most enduring set of myths from U.S. history comes from the political and social developments in what is called the "Progressive Era," a period lasting from the late 1800s to the end of World War I. (Of course, one could argue, convincingly, that the Progressive Era never has ended.) The prevailing story told in textbooks, the editorial pages of the New York Times, and the typical classroom holds that this was the time when people began to use the mechanism of government to create the conditions for a better life for all and to begin the arduous process of reining in the excesses of capitalism.
According to the pundits, by the late 1800s many businesses in the United States had grown to gigantic proportions, monopolizing much of the economy. In response to this growing emergency, the government adopted new and "progressive" policies of regulatory agencies and antitrust laws. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
One of the most enduring set of myths from U.S. history comes from the political and social developments in what is called the "Progressive Era," a period lasting from the late 1800s to the end of World War I. (Of course, one could argue, convincingly, that the Progressive Era never has ended.) The prevailing story told in textbooks, the editorial pages of the New York Times, and the typical classroom holds that this was the time when people began to use the mechanism of government to create the conditions for a better life for all and to begin the arduous process of reining in the excesses of capitalism.
According to the pundits, by the late 1800s many businesses in the United States had grown to gigantic proportions, monopolizing much of the economy. In response to this growing emergency, the government adopted new and "progressive" policies of regulatory agencies and antitrust laws. . . .
To read the entire article, click here.
Friday, December 11, 2009
The Declaration of Independence... on Leno?
A portion of the Declaration of Independence was featured on the Jay Leno show yesterday.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
James Madison on the Ten Commandments
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
- James Madison
- James Madison
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
