Does Anybody Really
Know What Time It Is?
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
September 2, 2013
Outpost of Freedom
September 2, 2013
There comes a time when we are past the point of words; only
action will achieve the goal that we have set.
That goal is founded upon our belief in, and our determination to
support, the Constitution -- and, the peaceful transition of the office of
President. Now, we must consider what to
do when that transfer appears to be the harbinger of the total destruction of
the way of life to which we are accustomed.
Every four years, the people of this country elect a new
Executive to wield the reins of government.
To date, the United States of America is the only country in the world
in which the government was truly created by the authority of the people. In so doing, they required that the Executive
take the following oath: "I do
solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of
President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
All subordinate offices, which require an oath, are similar
to the following: "I do solemnly
swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United
States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith
and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any
mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully
discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me
God."
Interestingly, with the exception of the Executive, the oath
includes, "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
against all enemies, foreign and domestic." The stipulation "all enemies, foreign and domestic",
though omitted in the former, is included in all of the latter.
In a previous article (Sons of Liberty #14);
the concept of self-government was discussed.
Part of that discussion dwelt upon the means by which governments are
dissolved (dissolution). First, they can
be dissolved by force, by a conquering army, wherein they are absorbed within
the government of the conqueror.
Second, they can be dissolved when an external force, not by
outright conquest, instills a modified form of the existing government, albeit
friendly to the external force, whereby through a slow transitional process,
the existing government is modified to a new form. (This, we impose upon countries under the
guise of bringing them democracy.)
Thirdly, when an existing representative form of government
is subverted by internal forces, such as: When the executive arbitrarily
imposes his will on the elected representatives and the people; when the trust
bestowed upon the legislative body is betrayed, by whatever means, whereby the
ultimate authority is transferred from the people to arbitrary authority by the
Legislative or the Executive, contrary to the document that brought the
legislative body into existence; and, lastly, when the people become subject to
the influence of a foreign power, thereby influencing the legislative body to
pass laws inconsistent with the original foundation of the government. It is of this last method of dissolution that
we must concern ourselves.
Of these three forms of dissolution of government, we must
concern ourselves with the third and its three basic elements.
Of the first, the Executive, we have seen in our history, a
number of usurpations that don't seem to be supported by the Constitution. John Adams elicited legislative support for
his Alien and Sedition Acts. These Acts
were to discourage dissent and criticism of the executive. Of them, the Supreme Court overturned some;
the remainder expired at the end of Adams' term of office. Later, Andrew Jackson refused to enforce laws
enacted by the legislature. During the
Civil War, both Lincoln and the Congress enacted laws contrary to the
Constitution. All of these, however,
pale when compared to recent usurpation of authority by the executive branch of
government, resulting in their near dictatorial power, without regard to the
Constitution, to which the executive oath was taken.
Of the next, the legislative, as discussed above, has been
willing, under generally extraordinary circumstances, to enact laws contrary to
the Constitution, has, recently, especially with the support of the judiciary,
imposed upon the people of this country laws that are totally outside of any
authority or power granted by the Constitution.
Beyond that, the judiciary has become legislative, and has broadened the
interpretation of laws enacted by the legislature, and, by undermining the
authority of the state governments to enact laws under their respective
constitutions, provided us with, rather than interpretations of the
Constitution, expansion of the authority of the federal government.
The consequences of the two above-mentioned usurpations has
resulted in an electorate comprised of foreign interests, often illegally
within this country, and often voting for those who promise them benefits and
privileges that are greater than even those allowed to the people of this
country.
The effect of the mis-administration of government according
to the Constitution has resulted in a dissolution of government by the third
method, which has been so subtle as to have been almost overlooked as it
incrementally dissolved our freedoms.
Let's look at some aspects of government, wherein we have
seen the results of incrementalism and destruction of the foundations of our
government.
Education: In 1867, an "Office of Education"
was established within the federal government.
Its purpose was to provide information and arrange for land grants to
establish state colleges for agricultural and mechanical purposes. Curriculum and all administrative matters
were determined at the local level. In
1953, a position was created and known as "Health, Education, and
Welfare". At that time, curriculum
and all administrative matters were determined at the local level, though in
some cases subject to state intrusion.
Today, we have a dictatorial federal agency that mandates curriculum,
testing, and social engineering, without regard to any more than token input
from interested parties, leaving all decisions in the hands of a few select
administrators. Do we need to continue
to pile incident upon incident to create a case? Or has the time come for action?
Religion: We have transformed the constitutional
prohibition of government enacting any "law respecting an establishment of
religion", to an unconstitutional, and undesirable, "separation of
church and state", to the point that United States Supreme Court, with
numerous engravings of the 10 Commandments or Moses on the edifices of that
institution has summarily dictated that any representation of Christian belief
cannot be demonstrated in, and in some cases even spoken of, in buildings owned
by the public. Meanwhile, atheism,
through the same Court, has caused the forced removal of Christian symbols that
have stood for decades, or longer, asserting that they are
unconstitutional. The tenets of Islam
(Shariah Law) have, however, found standing in the lesser courts to justify
actions that have been held as unlawful for centuries. Likewise, they have allowed promotion of
Islam in the same locations that they have denied the promotion of
Christianity. Do we need to continue to
pile incident upon incident to create a case?
Or has the time come for action?
Police: Even after World War II, police were
courteous, helpful, protective, polite, and friendly, matching the phrase
"to serve and to protect".
Today, they serve search or arrest warrants, with no less than half a
dozen militarily armed SWAT teams; breaking down doors, even if unlocked;
shooting dogs and terrorizing the occupants; and, often at the wrong
address. The more they are equipped
militarily, purportedly to provide officer protection, the more they are
inclined to utilize force, even deadly force, in the conduct of their
duties. Their own personal safety has
become paramount, with a total disregard for the safety of the public. Do we need to continue to pile incident upon
incident to create a case? Or has the
time come for action?
Criminal Justice:
"Hate crimes" have become the
watchword in criminal justice. If an act
of violence is initiated by a white person (or even Hispanic), then the full
force of justice will be imposed upon the perpetrator. If, however, the act of violence is initiated
by a black person on a white person, most often it will be asserted as a
robbery, whether property was taken, or not.
Do we need to continue to pile incident upon incident to create a
case? Or has the time come for action?
Constitutional
Justice: Federal judges have, in
numerous instances, determined that state constitutional amendments are
unconstitutional, even though the amendments were enacted in accordance with
state constitutions (Republican form of government) and are consistent with
federal law (as in the federal definition of marriage, 1 U.S.C. § 7), or
consistent with existing law and common sense (ruling barring Shariah law as a
defense in Oklahoma). These same federal
courts have become the source of unlawful legislation to accomplish, by
subjective means, social engineering, not authorized by the Constitution. Do we need to continue to pile incident upon
incident to create a case? Or has the
time come for action?
Debt: They have imposed upon, not only us, but also
our great grandchildren, a debt beyond comprehension. The ability to pay down that debt is
nonexistent, making it perpetual, though they continue to borrow and increase
that debt, making us a destitute nation.
Do we need to continue to pile incident upon incident to create a
case? Or has the time come for action?
Welfare: They have provided a smooth and easy path to
dependency for those unwilling to fend for themselves. With more people receiving food stamps, than
there are working for a living, we can only wonder, should this trend continue,
just who is providing for the food stamps.
The dependence upon government is at an historical high, and the continuation
of this policy has no end in sight. Do
we need to continue to pile incident upon incident to create a case? Or has the time come for action?
Immigration: They have provided an open door, complete with
financial incentive, to those who can find a better life, with less effort, by
violating existing laws within this country.
This open door policy denigrates the very concept of what it means to be
an "American", which in times past, was the pursuit of those who
entered this country abiding by the rules, with the intention of assimilation
rather than invasion. Do we need to
continue to pile incident upon incident to create a case? Or has the time come for action?
Veterans: Young men are sent, by the government, to
impose destruction and death upon perceived enemies of "our
freedoms". Once returned, those who
were willing to risk their lives "in defense of America" find that
the same government that sent them on those dastardly deeds has now labeled
them as enemies of the state. Do we need
to continue to pile incident upon incident to create a case? Or has the time come for action?
Are those same veterans now willing to, once again, risk
their lives for really protecting our freedom and liberty -- from those who
have used them and then tossed them aside?
Do they still have the courage and the desire to do what must be
done? Perhaps they need only look around
and understand that the people, not the government, need their willingness,
once again, to fight, and die, if necessary, to preserve those freedoms.
It has always, throughout history, primarily fallen to the
young men of our nation, whether they have prior military service, or not, and
those who support them, to preserve this "grand experiment" of
self-government, the United States of America, or to abandon it to those who
have corrupted that which was our birthright, and allow their children, their
posterity, to submit to a slavery that they are becoming subject to, at this
very moment.
There is no longer any need for "a line in the
sand", as it will surely be moved, once again, after we have allowed the
incremental expansion of dictatorial government to remove even more of that
which made us great. It is now upon us
-- it is time to ACT.
"Is
life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and
slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!"
Patrick
Henry, March 23, 1775
Surrender is not an option, though if we continue to submit
to the encroachments that are daily imposed upon us, it will surely be the
result of our inaction.
This article can be
found on line at Does
Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?
Suggested reading: