The Collectivist’s Prayer

Our government who is in Washington, D.C.,
Hallowed be your name (we beseech you to hear our humble voices).

Your kingdom come (we’ve forgotten we’re a republic under God).

Your laws be obeyed (all 93,376,945 of them)
In our own home towns (since Swamp-Dwellers are exempt and somebody’s got to obey all those laws).

Give us this day our daily bread (we’re too lazy to work for it ourselves).

And take from them haves and give to us have-nots (your incessant “equality” propaganda has begun to wear off)
And do not lead us into prudence, wisdom, or responsibility, but deliver us from ourselves (oh all-wise government).

For yours is the rule and the power and the sovereign authority forever (until you cede it to the United Nations).
Amen (and Awomen).

🙂

Advertisements

Professor P.C. Doublespeak

Professor

I’m still not quite sure he knew who he was getting himself into an interview with, but somehow I obtained an appointment with the prominent professor.

I arrived precisely on time, being well aware of his propensity to get upset and call names when facing unpleasant circumstances.

The golden plaque on his door spelled out his distinguished name, Professor P. C. Doublespeak. I stared at it a moment before knocking, wondering how he had managed to end up with such a fantastic name.

He opened the door, glanced me over rather suspiciously, and with a grunt motioned for me to come in. His office was neat, smelled of old books, and was lined with well-stocked bookshelves.

Seeking to establish common ground right away, I gestured toward the handsome book cases and began cordially, “You are a bookworm, Professor?”

Heavily seating himself behind his cluttered desk, his eyes narrowed and he answered, “That is a racial insult—I cannot tolerate such racist remarks on this proudly diverse campus.”

“I apologize,” I offered hastily, searching my mind for any clue as to the discriminatory nature of the word I had grown up with.

Bookworm. Well! Who knew? Another word to eliminate from my vocabulary, I thought. I learn something new every day as a journalist!

At the same time, I took the seat he graciously offered and cocked my head, attempting to read the titles of some of his volumes. I restrained a gasp when I saw Marx’s Das Kapital, directly next to The Communist Manifesto. My eyes fell upon another shelf and seeing an entire collection under the name of Lenin, I read such titles as What Is To Be Done?, The State And Revolution, and On the Great October Socialist Revolution. On yet another shelf I saw the enormous tome Tragedy & Hope—a work by a professor of another era.

“He studies the philosophy and strategy of the enemy,” I thought with new respect. “This will be more interesting than I thought.”

I was right.

I opened my enormous flip pad and pulled out my good, old-fashioned wooden pencil.

“Thank you for giving me some of your time,” I began pleasantly; “I know you are extremely busy and I appreciate this opportunity to give our readers a chance to hear from you.”

I arranged my papers and launched right into the substance of the interview, since it appeared he had nothing to say in reply except for his grunt of acknowledgement.

“Professor, what’s the number one worst thing going wrong today?” I asked,  idly flipping my pencil between my fingers.

“As I always tell my students, there are too many things going wrong,” he replied, adjusting his spectacles ceremoniously.

I thought he looked actually pleased for the first time since I had walked inside—now that he had a chance to rant against the evils of the world. He himself looked as though he had been heavily affected by the world’s woes and burdens.

He sounded as if he was reciting an official report of What’s Wrong With the World. “The president is the most insane president since Calvin Coolidge, people are too intolerant, the earth continues to warm at alarming rates, glaciers are melting, animals are dying, poor people are getting poorer and rich folks are getting richer, people are abandoning progress and reverting to Stone Age isolationism—and then, of course, racism is rampant.” I thought I saw a severe gleam in his eye as he mentioned that last concern.

Hurriedly I scrawled down his main concerns, privately amazed at what he found most alarming. It was not, I confess, what I had quite expected from so eminent and informed a citizen.

“Define intolerance for me, please,” I said. “There’s much talk of it and it would be helpful to know clearly what you mean by it.”

“It’s being intolerant of other people or their beliefs, of course,” he answered, professing shock at my childish ignorance. “It has become a major problem in recent years particularly. Religionists seek to force their dogma on individuals who simply seek to live their lives free of religion. Do you know how difficult it is for a science-believer to be accepted and successful in a community of militant Christians?”

“Are you, then, a non-believer, Professor?” I asked, unable to conceal my shock.

“I am a firm believer in science and reality,” he retorted. “I refuse to engage in fanciful speculations about things we cannot observe.”

He pointed to a dull, colorless poster hanging on the wall. “Only when religion becomes tolerant can the world have true peace. It’s one of the most important things I teach my students.”

Surprised and rather dismayed, I moved on with the interview, determined to continue listening with an open mind.

“So climate change is a main concern of yours?” I asked. “What do you think we should do about it?”

“The present Administration has been aggressively pursuing the destruction of Mother Earth, which is nothing but suicidal,” he said, his jaw tightening. “I feel very strongly about responsible action to ensure a clean, inhabitable earth for future generations.

“We need to take measures to combat climate change and stop anthropogenic global warming. Sustainable energy is a must, government oversight is a must, global cooperation is a must . . .”

I failed to notice that I had ceased either writing or listening and had instead begun examining a stack of papers on his desk, bound with a green paper clip, sitting next to an organic granola bar. The cover page read, The Case for Socialism – Justice, Equality, and the War to Overcome Prejudice.

“Well?” he barked, abruptly interrupting my thoughts.

I cleared my throat somewhat nervously and pretended to finish taking a few remaining notes. This interview had turned out to be an intensely uncomfortable one.

“What are your views on socialism?” I asked, throwing in a question not on my list to satisfy my own curiosity.

“It is the philosophy of our time,” he answered brazenly. “It is the only hope of mankind. Only when we overthrow the oppression of the bourgeoisie and institute a new order for humanity can we enjoy true equality, tolerance, and security.”

“Professor, that sounds more like Marx,” I protested in growing alarm. “Surely you don’t believe in the ideology of The Communist Manifesto? The Bolshevik Revolution? Mao Tse-tung?”

“Well . . .” he hesitated at first, fingering a heap of student papers on his desk, “some argue that Lenin and Mao came across too strongly—too zealous—but their intentions were pure. They recognized the sacrifice was worth the long-term benefit to humanity. I believe we need more of that kind of dedication today to save us from the regressive policies of the Right.”

Astounded, I twiddled my pencil and let his words sink in more fully. Seriously? An American professor promoting twentieth century Communism? What about Communism’s demise?

He wasn’t through yet, however.

“Socialism for America is not enough. Once we’ve succeeded in making our own nation a truly equal society, where the individual gives up his own preferences and beliefs for the good of the community, we’ll share the success. We are morally bound to give progress, socialism, and equality to the oppressed peoples of the world.”

“But, Professor,” I argued, “isn’t that a little bit tyrannical? Forcing our system of government on other countries? I thought you were opposed to the Right imposing capitalism on unwilling nations. I’m afraid I don’t quite follow your line of reasoning.”

His eyes flashed dangerously. “Worldwide socialism will be a boon to all of us,” he carefully evaded my question, at the same time trying to employ his legendary ability to intimidate into silence. “In the long run, humanity will thank revolutionaries like us for bringing them into it—against their will, even—until they have been released from the bourgeoisie deception and experience true freedom and equality.”

US?” I repeated in disbelief. “‘Humanity will thank revolutionaries like ‘us’? Professor, surely you don’t mean to say you are actively working toward world communism, do you?” I was almost beside myself with the discovery. The man behind the intellectual mask was quite a shocking one indeed.

“Why, how else would I help the cause—inactively?” he glared, his voice rising. “It’s young folks like you who now stand between us and Utopia! Let me guess—you were homeschooled and you learned all about God, guns, and country.” I nodded. In spite of all else, his perception was amazingly keen. “Socialism will never work until your kind are reeducated in the essentials!” he boomed with flaming eyes.

He regained his composure and took a deep breath. With great dignity he said quietly, significantly, “I recommend you start by going to college.”

I stared into space and nodded silently as I mentally began to connect the dots. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of thinking aloud.

So,” I mused, “I go to college and get reeducated and learn how bad America is, how good socialism is, how to stop global warming, how to become a traitor to my country without being punished as such, how to be a ‘useful idiot’. . .” my voice trailed off as I snapped back to reality and suddenly realized with dismay that I was actually speaking out loud.

Glancing over at him and seeing the vehement look on his face, I decided the interview was over and rapidly rose, just barely remembering to grab my note pad as I headed out.

As he pursued me to the door, I turned around and asked just one more question.

“By the way, Professor,” I said, stepping into the hall and keeping one foot just enough inside the door to prevent him from closing it. “Would you mind sharing your name? As I’m sure you are well aware, we know what Doublespeak means, but many of us have been wondering what the initials P. C. stand for. You would dispel a lot of speculations by . . .”

He cut me off with an impatient flourish for me to remove my foot from hindering the closing of the door. “Be gone!” he roared, and the door slammed shut.

I seated myself on the closest bench in the hall and rapidly took down all the notes I had neglected to record while inside, realizing with a thrill how excited Mr. Bland would be to receive my explosive story. I hadn’t ever seen anything like it in my life—no one must know the truth about Professor Doublespeak or the universities or their secret push for communism! I thought naively.

I was literally on the edge of my seat as I drove back to work and burst into the office of my supervisor.

“I have the biggest story of the century, Mr. Bland!” I announced with all the zeal and confidence of a novice journalist who has not gone to college to learn journalism and is instead learning as-they-go.

He turned to face me, swinging around in his chair.

“Well, what is it?” he asked with trademark complacency.

“Here’s my notes from the interview with Professor P. C. Doublespeak,” I answered, proudly thrusting my big yellow pad forward.

He rapidly scanned it as I told him the abbreviated story.

“Communism, socialism, global warming, universities, bourgeoisie, reeducation—it’s all there, Mr. Bland!”

“I don’t think we’ll be able to print it,” he informed me laconically, pushing it aside.

“Whyever not?!” I demanded, hardly able to believe my ears. “This is news like you’ve never heard! A journalist’s dream—we have a plot, secrecy, evidence, significance . . . what a story! What else could you want?!”

“It’s unsuitable for our readership base. Thank you for your effort. I think I shall enroll you in the Progressive Journalism course after all,” he said blandly.

“Why is it unsuitable?” I insisted, wondering if I had somehow misunderstood the Professor and botched the interview.

“When presented with items of this kind, we are told they are baseless, discredited, and lacking either proof or importance,” he stated, swinging around in his chair to face his computer once more.

As I retreated in a state of mental disarray, I could hear Mr. Bland’s fingers pounding on his keyboard again. I was more perplexed than before. It was the most confusing day I could remember.

I have since decided not to seek interviews with Professors, Liberals, Globalists, or PC Police, figuring my time would be better spent elsewhere.

The Simple Truth

The Lord’s prayer has 56 words. Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address has 266. The Ten Commandments have 297. The Declaration of Independence has 300. But a government order setting the price of cabbage has 26,911 words.” – George Fuerman

It’s rather pathetic, isn’t it? (Not to mention a great burden to those attempting to earn livings and raise families in these insane times.)

Modern federal regulations reach into practically every aspect of both our business and personal lives. Surely the Founding Fathers didn’t intend for the limited federal government they created in 1787 to mushroom to its present size, did they?

As a matter of fact, they didn’t — and that’s why they wrote the Constitution!

Here’s an important fact about the Constitution most people don’t know: our supreme law of the land was written to govern the federal government rather than the states and the people.

Another the thing most people don’t know is that ours is an enumerated Constitution — which basically means that any powers not specifically delegated to the federal government in the Constitution are left completely up to the states and the people (see 10th Amendment).

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution lists most of the powers given to Congress. They are legally only allowed to do those things the Constitution says they may do! This is a revolutionary concept in modern American society, but if enough Americans knew just this much about the Constitution — that it is an enumerated Constitution and that Congress can’t do “pretty much anything it wants to” after all — things would begin to change. Irresponsible politicians would be voted out of office and replaced by statesmen who recognize and respect the rule of law.

Here’s a short list of things the federal government (none of the three branches — not one!) is authorized to do, and therefore may not do:

  • Provide education
  • Force citizens to purchase health insurance
  • Deploy American troops in foreign countries all across the world in undeclared “wars”
  • Provide for those who do not work
  • Regulate business
  • Offer grants to local governments
  • Restrict firearm possession
  • Spy on innocent Americans
  • Designate land as national parks
  • Enter into so-called “free trade agreements” and incrementally subject America to international control
  • And on and on and on.

John McManus, president emeritus of The John Birch Society, a nationwide group that focuses on restoring obedience to the Constitution, said of America’s amazing prosperity and success:

America did not become great because of what government did; America became great because of what government was prevented from doing.

When We the People grew lax about enforcing the Constitution, lo and behold this federal behemoth appeared and continued growing till it reached its present size!

We must restore obedience to the US Constitution at every level of government, and in order to do this, we must build widespread understanding about the founding principles, our solid foundation, and what has been going wrong.

The Constitution is the true solution!

Guns, Tent-Pegs, & Nylons

The following is an excerpt from the first chapter of E. Merrill Root’s 1971 book entitled America’s Steadfast Dream.

“One mode of anti-frontier and anti-self-reliance propaganda is contemporary hysteria about gun control – a part of the materialistic determinism of the hour. To the superficial minds of ‘Liberals,’ collectivists, Marxians, et al., instruments are supposed to act upon man, and men (no longer self-reliant) merely to be acted upon; to them, murder lies in the gun and not in the soul of man. So they think that to deprive men of guns would prevent man from murder!

“What the Power Boys – the Insiders – behind the gun controls really want, of course, is not to control guns but to control us. . . .

“Gun control is the new Prohibition. It will not work, as Prohibition did not work. But meanwhile it will be tried, as a sentimental cure-all, a new usurpation of the rights of a once thoroughly self-reliant people, another step on the march to 1984. It is only a symptom of our modern disease, but it is well worth examining at a little more length. And, as I recently made a trip to the land of Sentimentalia, and brought back a published account of gun controls there, I hope you will permit me to offer it as evidence speaking to our condition:

‘A few hundred of the several hundred million citizens of Sentimentalia have in recent years have been shot by criminals. The Congress of that land, led by Senators Tom Prodd and Jokey Hidings, and egged on by the President, responded with a law to first register, and eventually confiscate, all the wicked instruments known as “guns.” The law was passed amid tears of joy.

‘But, alas, when guns continued to be used by the happy thugs thus freed from the fear of being shot by self-reliant citizens, the Prohibitionists claimed that this meant that knives needed to be forbidden . . . and then violence and murders would end. They already had laws against switchblades (quietly evaded); but now they claimed that any sort of knife was lethal; so they sent out teams of bureaucrats to register pocket-knives, letter-openers, and straight-edged razors, and to register and license the owners of paring-knives and butcher-knives, and steak-knives and ice-picks . . . so nobody was supposed to be murdered any more. Some conforming, society-hypnotized housewives even came marching into police stations with aprons full of knives, and sang, “You Shall Overcome” as they dumped them in heaps . . . presumably to be melted into plowshares. (Nobody was ever sure of this, and the cynical even suggested that they found their way to the underprivileged, for after all the underprivileged needed knives.)

‘Even so, murders continued in Sentimentalia, and sporadic violence, so the Prohibitionists announced that it was because the controls hadn’t gone far enough. After all, murders were often committed with baseball bats, hammers, axes, hatchets, etc., etc., and how could you have a non-violent world until you did away with baseball bats, hammers, axes, and hatchets, etc., etc. Thereupon carpenters, bowed with a sense of guilt, paraded into public squares with hatchets and hammers by the gross, and dumped them before the melting pots. But houses were no longer built, and baseball ceased to be much of a game, and Paul Bunyon went for the tall timber and was never seen again because, as a self-reliant man, he wouldn’t register his axe.

‘When murders still continued, the Prohibitionists found a wicked book called the Hebrew Bible, and discovered that Jael had killed the sleeping Sisera with a nail or a tent peg, and Samson had slain a thousand with the jawbone of an ass – and so they registered and licensed all tent-pegs and nails, and searched out and confiscated the jawbone of every last ass. And when the murders still took place, the Prohibitionists found that they were sometimes committed with women’s stockings, so now no woman was allowed to appear with stockings unless her legs were examined full length to assure that she had a license sewed onto her nylons, and eventually they decided that women had no constitutional right to stockings anyway, and should keep them in a public repository while not wearing them, and call for them when needed. And the police went around stripping nylons off women’s legs, and everybody was sure that this was the end of murder.

‘Next some “Liberal” read a play by William Shakespeare and found that Othello murdered Desdemona with a pillow, so all pillows had to be licensed. Often the Prohibitionists came breaking into homes at night, and snatched pillows from under sleepy heads for failure to produce a license. When murders still continued, “Liberals” discovered that desperate men used fingernails and teeth, and now going to extremes they extracted all teeth and abolished all fingernails. But even this wasn’t enough. They discovered that murders had been committed by kicking; so you had to have a license for a pair of shoes, and you had to register every pair of feet, and some large, brutal-looking feet were amputated.

‘By this time, people were so fed up with controls that they took out after the sentimentalists and the Power Boys with fists and fingers and frozen snowballs and rocks. Senators Prodd and Hidings and even the President took refuge in bomb-shelters and managed to survive; but on the other side of their trauma they armed themselves with guns.’

“Such is the account of something rotten in the State of Sentimentalia. But ‘Liberals’ never learn, and the Prohibitionists still suppose that murder is in the gun and not in the soul of man!”

Wake Up, America!

“The world watches America, and America watches TV. America, former land of the free and home of the brave; America, a land in which workers get paid for not working, mothers get paid for not marrying, farmers get paid for not farming, and promoters get paid for fertilizer tanks which ain’t; America, where the only God recognized in the classroom in Santa Claus. A people who lack the morality to stand on their feet and say no will some day have to say yes on their knees. A people who won’t take a stand deserve to take a fall.” – Thomas Jefferson Anderson, 1964

Wake up America!

Dear fellow Americans:

In spite of having elected the best president since Calvin Coolidge, we have not yet won the battle for American liberty.

We have work to do. Our Constitutional Republic is still in grave danger of being destroyed.

Our troops are still scattered over the face of the earth.

The United Nations continues taking powers unto itself.

NAFTA is being renegotiated rather than canceled.

The Constitution is still ignored—and is, in fact, dangerously close to being destroyed via a national Constitutional Convention.

There is an outright war on local police. Violence is erupting across the country.

Education is still controlled federally.

The general populace is still largely ignorant of the founding principles of limited government and protection of God-given rights that made America great in the first place.

Even if President Trump was a strict constitutionalist and made even greater strides than he already has in rolling back federal regulations, ditching the global warming scam, and restoring American sovereignty and independence, he still couldn’t accomplish everything necessary to steer America back onto the road of limited, constitutional government.

And that’s a good thing.

In writing the Constitution, the Founding Fathers deliberately gave all lawmaking powers—that’s 100%—to the legislative branch, Congress—not the executive or judicial branches.

Therefore the president can only do so much toward saving the country.

The rest of it is up to you and me.

Many people realize that the representatives and senators we keep sending to Washington aren’t doing their job correctly. Most of us recognize that Congress  lets the other branches step outside their constitutional limitations, while they themselves also overstep their constitutional boundaries.

But we keep on electing them.

Year after year, the American Congress continues to run up huge deficits through unconstitutional spending—things like foreign aid, disaster relief, welfare, endless bureaucracy, spying on the American people, federalizing local police departments, and doing many other things that would have been unimaginable to our Founding Fathers when they penned a Constitution that granted “few and defined” powers to the federal government.

Yet we keep reelecting them.

In order to accurately prescribe a solution to any problem, the first step is to find the root cause of the problem. If we don’t go all the way down to the deepest roots, or we look at the roots of the wrong tree, we will never be able to discover the true solution.

If we were to suppose that the federal government’s abuse of power is the problem, we would only have discovered the uppermost roots of the problem tree—the ones crawling along above ground and visible to all.

Digging a little deeper, we might guess that the cause of our straying so far from our founding principles is due to subversive influence of our government. But that’s still not the heart and core of our very serious problem.

Here’s the root problem, America:

We the People have allowed our government to grow too big, too expensive, and too intrusive by neglecting civic responsibility.

The problem is us! When Americans would rather watch football, spend their lives on social media, live in virtual realities, and engage in all the other “urgent” things with which we can waste our time than take civic responsibility—that’s where we’ve gone wrong. And that’s why we’re in the mess we are.

This neglecting of civic responsibility has been gradually increasing over multiple generations.

Not without outside influence, of course.

Those who want to rule the world and are pushing for the New World Order have long sought to distract Americans with meaningless, frivolous diversions. They don’t want us to wake up and see our country being rapidly swallowed up by regional and global governance.

Tune into establishment media organs and it won’t take you long to notice the lack of important things discussed. (Granted, they do their best to make the focus of their reporting seem terribly important.) In the political arena, their main focus is on the president—who, as mentioned earlier, does not have a great amount of power—and guess what? How much influence do you really have on the president?

The media directs our attention to either unimportant items or problems we can’t do much about. This powerfully coordinated campaign to destroy America has the advantage of having mainstream media on their side—giving false solutions and spreading misinformation.

If our problem is a widespread and generational lack of civic responsibility, what is the proper solution?

This is an incredibly simple answer:

The Constitution is the solution!

The way Chris Stevens, National Field Director for The John Birch Society, puts it, the American Constitution “enabled a greater amount of freedom and prosperity for a greater number of people than any system ever devised by man.”

The Constitution limits the government rather than the states and the people, creating a free market and an environment that motivates bettering oneself by being allowed to keep the fruits of one’s labor.

In reality our constitutional system is so incredibly simple that any of us can easily learn and understand it—and educate others about it to create a responsible, informed electorate. (But who cares about exerting work like that? Especially during football season!)

An excellent resource to begin to understand the constitutional principles that made America so free and prosperous is The John Birch Society’s Overview of America. In 29 minutes you can get a fascinating overview of why the American experiment in individual liberty worked for so long—and what is happening today.

Once you’ve educated yourself on the Constitution and America’s foundational principles (which is easier than you think), the next step is to move on to sharing your new found knowledge with others. Begin with those in your circle of influence—friends, family, neighbors, co-workers, fellow church members, etc.

Educate them on both the problem (an irresponsible electorate resulting in an irresponsible government) and the solution (a responsible, informed electorate resulting in a constitutional, limited government).

If you went to work educating the electorate in your local community, this would be fantastic. You’d be able to make a difference. You might see a better informed electorate begin making wiser choices in choosing local public servants.

But suppose that you were not the only one educating the electorate in your community. Imagine what would happen if others were doing the same thing, reaching out to their circles of influence with powerful educational material.

Can you think of certain community policies that would begin to change as the educated electorate voted wisely and chose advocates of limited government? Can you rattle off a list of local officials who would be replaced with principled constitutionalists?

Things happen when the electorate is properly informed—and even better, things happen when we work in concert. If you and a dozen others in your community were educating the electorate, you could expect far more changes for the better than if you alone engaged in effective action of this type. Concerted action is powerful.

Now imagine for a moment the difference in our country if thousands of responsible citizens worked to educate and activate their circles of influence all across the country!

There is only one nationwide, concerted-action organization who creates professional educational material for members to distribute all across the nation to their circles of influence and especially leaders and opinion molders. Working in concert on the most significant issues, JBS has repeatedly thwarted the establishment in key battles.

That’s why The John Birch Society has been so viciously attacked by the establishment over the decades since its founding in 1958.

Its founder, Robert Welch, recognized that the collection of conservative single-issue debating societies spread across America could never beat the thoroughly entrenched political establishment pushing us into the New World Order. That’s the reason he founded The John Birch Society—something new and unique in the history of mankind.

Members work in concert all across the nation solving the root of the problem by educating the electorate. JBS produces a vast selection of educational materials for dedicated patriots to use in waking up their fellow citizens.

Properly solving the problem is not easy. It’s far easier to engage in partisan politics or attend rallies and feel that one is making a difference. It’s even easier to ignore the problem entirely and live in blissful ignorance—but ignorance is only bliss for so long. Sooner or later we’d find ourselves asking in despair, “I wonder how we got here?”

We must get involved in saving the republic before it gets to that point because by then it would be too late. Our only recourse at that point would be our guns—if we still had them.

So yes, it is far easier to be a responsible, patriotic citizen now than it would be farther down the road if things do not change.

Creating a responsible informed electorate is the only way we will be able to fix Congress and the rest of the country.

We must work like it depends on us—because it does; and we must pray like it depends on God—because it does.

Will your children and grandchildren enjoy as much freedom as you?

I’ll close with an excellent quote from the same man we began with a quote from.

“I’m for The John Birch Society. Not only that, I’m for Robert Welch. The John Birch Society offers the best organization, the best plan and the best program and leadership I know to save America from socialism, insolvency and surrender. If there is a better organization, lead me to it. I want to join it—and I’m not a joiner. . . .

“‘But I don’t want to join an organization which has been smeared,’ some say. If you belong to an anti-Communist organization which has not been smeared, get out of it, you’re wasting your time. Every person from Martin Dies on down who has done a job against the Communists gets hurt. It’s okay to fight ‘Communism’; that’s sort of like being against sin. But if you do a real job specifically against Communists—their work, their people, their occasions, their events, their programs—you’re going to be crucified. . . .

“It’s a great tribute to The John Birch Society that it is the number one target of the Communist Party in this country. The John Birch Society has been called monolithic. It needs to be monolithic, else it would have been infiltrated and destroyed long ago. But there is no compulsion at any level in The John Birch Society. . . . We don’t believe in compulsion. We believe in individualism. . . . Some people say, ‘But I can do more good on the outside.’ My favorite question to that is: what?” – Thomas Jefferson Anderson, 1963

NAFTA – Renegotiating a Disaster

“It is our clear policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world.” — George Washington

Since America abandoned the sound advice of our Founding Fathers concerning alliances with foreign nations, we have become more and more involved in international organizations and agreements. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has been one of these disasters, which are falsely styled “free trade agreements.”

While many people—including President Trump—recognize that NAFTA has been a “bad deal” for America, the focus has mainly been on the least important aspects of the failure of NAFTA.

Most discussion has centered around the undesirable economic ramifications of NAFTA—how it’s harmed our economy and caused unemployment. The real dangers that NAFTA—and similar entangling alliances—pose to the freedom and sovereignty of our Constitutional Republic are rarely talked about.

Don’t let them make you think it’s all about bringing back jobs, increasing economic prosperity, establishing fair trade, and renegotiating a “better” deal. The far more important issues at hand are the long-term dangers to American liberty and sovereignty.

Another question asked far too little is whether America should even be involved in negotiating “trade” agreements with other countries in the first place. For one thing, American involvement in international organizations is unconstitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution is there authority given to any branch of the federal government to enter into and subject America to international governing bodies.

Continued involvement in NAFTA—even a renegotiated NAFTA—will result in further erosion of national sovereignty, more globalism, and even more destructive “trade agreements.”

The European Union—a disastrous, socialist international trade bloc—was built by agreements similar to NAFTA. One agreement, pact, and partnership at a time, the same globalists who engineered the EU’s gradual advance from economic integration to complete political integration also plan to destroy America’s sovereignty by the same gradual process. They want a North American Union.

In order to reach world government, which is the ultimate aim of both internationalists and globalists, they must feed globalism to us a little bit at a time. They know we’d never swallow the whole bottle of poison at once. Like the unfortunate frog in the gradually-heated boiling pot, we’re having globalism spoon-fed to us one trade agreement at a time.

If they are allowed to continue, someday we’ll find ourselves completely subservient to an EU-style supranational government. And once they fully entangle every part of the world—and especially America—into these regional unions, it will be an easy step to merge them into one New World Order.

Britain voted to get out of the EU over a year ago. They still are fighting to get out, and will have to keep on fighting if they are going to successfully throw off the chains of international bureaucracy in Brussels and regain their national sovereignty.

Let’s get out of NAFTA and other international outfits such as NATO and the United Nations, before we become trapped in the predicament of Europe’s once free and independent nations.

NAFTA is a bad deal not just because of “jobs,” but because it’s a major stepping stone to subjecting America to a supranational government.

Take Action – Get Us Out! of NAFTA

Additional Information on NAFTA:

 

What Is the Proper Role of Government?

In a day-in-age where OSHA labors to protect us from ourselves, and the United Nations is exploring ways to make us “happy,” and the Supreme Court rules that same-sex “marriage” is legal, a woefully neglected foundational question that must be asked is, “What is the proper role of government?”

Historical examples reveal many governmental failures, and the resulting tragedies.

The reason government tends to fail is that it tends to grow. And through growth of government comes corruption, higher taxes, manipulation of the money supply, rules and regulations, economic instability, distortion of justice, poverty for the masses, power for the elites, and ultimately, abolition of individual freedom. The failed government may consider itself successful in reaching its objectives—but its people suffer.

It has been aptly stated: “That government is best which governs least.” The growth of a government does not bode well for its citizens. Expansion of governmental powers always precedes—and causes—destruction of unalienable rights and poverty for the enslaved masses. Governments left to themselves, like children, invariably begin overstepping established boundaries.

Yet too little government—or complete anarchy—creates just as significant failures as governments which have grown too large. There is a proper balance between too much and too little government. What is the proper role of government, and when is it just the right size?

The Proper Role
In order to determine the proper role of government, one must start at the source of life and freedom—our Creator—and examine His standard for civil authority.

In Romans 13 as well as throughout the Old Testament, God established that the main function of government is to protects its citizens:

  • From domestic criminals by executing justice on those who have violated the rights of another individual; and
  • From foreign enemies by raising an army in case of belligerent attack.

Put simply, government is there to protect the rights of its citizens. Nothing more, nothing less.

This is, however, still too vague of a job description, for what are “rights”? Many liberals call education, health care, and housing basic human “rights,” while conservatives fight for other rights such as life, private property, and self-defense. Who is to have the final say on defining “rights”?

Once more we turn to the Lawgiver and Supreme Judge of the World to definitively answer the question.

In establishing the standard of justice and the duties of civil government, He gave every individual human being rights. He reveals some of our unalienable—that is, God-given—rights in the 10 Commandments.

“Thou shalt not steal” names the right to private property. “Thou shalt not murder” gives every individual the right to life. “Thou shalt not commit adultery” gives us the right to marry.

Frédéric Bastiat said succinctly, “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”

“If men were angels,” said James Madison, “no government would be necessary.” If mankind was 100% righteous, there would be no need for government at all. Period. We’d all govern ourselves. But since we aren’t angels . . . Executing justice by punishing wrong-doers is the chief duty of government, and only by strict, impartial enforcement of established laws protecting human rights is crime discouraged.

The Declaration of Independence eloquently proclaimed that “all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” It further proclaimed “that to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.”

In one of the most important founding documents of our nation, the appropriate duty of civil government is clearly enunciated. Following the eight long years of the War for Independence, the Founders wrote the Constitution, which embodied the role of good government.

They created a Constitutional Federal Republic in which the federal government was granted limited and specified powers—namely, to protect the unalienable rights of Americans for generations to come.

The limited government designed by the Founding Fathers was not meant to be a government that grew in scope and power. Incorporating Biblical principles and protection of God-given rights into both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they established a rule of law based on the divine pattern for good, legitimate government.

Their experiment in freedom, limited government, and checks and balances produced a greater amount of freedom and prosperity for a greater number of people than any system ever devised by man. God knew what He was doing when He gave us our rights, and He knew what He was doing when He instituted civil government to protect them.

It is the expansion of the federal government beyond the powers granted it by the Constitution that our modern problems lie.

An Over-Sized Government
Our federal government has transitioned into a corrupt sugar-daddy system of, by, and for the politicians (and their cronies). They purchase votes by promising other people’s money. That used to be called “stealing” in the good old days; now it’s “public charity” and we Christians are told to support it because Christ told us to care for the poor. Yet He never told us to get government to look out for the needy, and He certainly never indicated that government programs to “end” poverty are a good idea. He said, “You will always have the poor with you.”

Thomas J. Anderson (1910-2002), a conservative author and speaker, depicted a striking illustration of the reality of federal welfare programs. In 1965 he said,

“Even if there were a real need for government projects [specifically welfare & grants], calling on the federal government to do it is like giving yourself a blood transfusion from your right arm to your left arm with a leaky tube. In the case of federal aid the leaky tube represents the swarm of bureaucrats who live off your blood. The federal government has no money, except what it takes from you. The federal government does not create anything. It is a poisonous parasite, fatal when absorbed in large doses. The real reason for federal aid is that the administrations seduce the people by giving them ‘other people’s money.’ … That’s the PLAN: one all-powerful, centralized government in Washington. The Planners say that in our complex society we no longer have the necessary money at the local level. If we don’t it’s because these leeches have stolen from us. Sending money to Washington so the Planners can send it back to us is a continuous transfusion in which the bureaucrats keep one-third for their own use. If we are to save and restore our constitutional Republic, we must assume, at the local level, those rights, privileges, taxing powers, and responsibilities guaranteed by the greatest freedom document ever devised by man, the Constitution of the United States.”

Both foreign and domestic aid are both beyond the scope of good government, and are even more clearly beyond the scope of the Constitution.

Federal welfare programs are merely one example among hundreds that could be used to demonstrate the disaster and corruption resulting from governmental interference in local and/or private affairs. Federal intrusion has made a mess of healthcare, agriculture, drugs, education, and many more areas. When the feds get involved in anything not delegated to them by the Constitution—inevitably armed with higher taxes and more constrictive regulations and red tape—prices go up, quality comes down, citizens are dissatisfied, and government has gathered even more power unto itself.

If our federal government stayed within its Constitutional boundaries, the issue of excessive and burdensome taxes would practically vanish. The federal leviathan would be dramatically reduced in size and cost. The budget would be balanced in no time and they could actually afford to lower taxes!

Below are many modern fallacious beliefs about the role of our federal government, emanating from both sides of the political aisle.

Government Should. . .
Ensure every child receives an “education.”
Manage citizens’ retirement funds and insure they are cared for.
See to it that every person has health insurance, regardless of the needs and priorities of the individual.
Fight terrorism abroad.
Help foreign despotic regimes by giving them billions of American tax dollars and fighting their wars for them with the blood of American boys and girls.
Fund state and local departments through grants.
Clamp down on greedy corporations.
Bail out banks and businesses that are “too big” to fail.
Protect us from ourselves.
Manage industries.
Provide welfare for the poor.
Set price controls and determine minimum wage.
Surrender sovereignty to as many supranational and world governing-bodies as possible.
Engage in endless no-win wars.
Legislate “marriage” standards for Americans.
Define when human life begins.
Fund abortion.
Grant tax-breaks to those it deems worthy.
Manage the monetary system.
Make its citizens “happy.”
Protect the environment.
And much, much more.

America has a colossal government which has far out-stepped the bounds of good government, causing myriad problems in every area in which it gets involved.

On April 8, 2010, John Bachtell, who later became—and is today—Chairman of the Communist Party USA, provided a partial view of the Communist view of the role of government in an article for People’s World entitled “What is the role of government?” (No, I didn’t forget to properly capitalize the letters in the title—that was the forgetting of People’s World.)

“The role of government and its ability to make a difference in people’s daily lives is not a question the progressive or democratic movement can take lightly . . . For 30 years the extreme right wing and Republicans have been doing every thing in their power to dismantle the part of government that addresses people’s needs [If only!] . . . Government is an arena of the class struggle. Whenever government actually serves the interests of people it is the result of bitterly fought battles . . . [The public] appreciates social services and any protections from corporate exploitation, racial or gender discrimination. But people’s faith in government has eroded in the face of the constant anti-government ultra-right ideological barrage.”

What Chairman Bachtell means by government “actually serving the interests of people,” of course, is government serving the interest of communist elites. Even while they promise grand socialist programs to benefit the “working class,” supposedly to make our lives easier, they acquire power for themselves and punish those of us who labor for our bread.

The empty Communist promise of “equality” translates into “equal poverty for all” through governmental redistribution of wealth—definitely beyond the power of Biblical or Constitutional government.

Lastly, Mr. Bachtell, most of us “ultra-righters” are not, as you claim, “anti-government.” We are for a just government. A Biblical government. A Constitutional government. A government that serves the people by protecting their rights.

A nation who is so lazy, apathetic, and indolent that they want their government to provide for them deserve exactly what they’ll get: tyranny. Ludwig von Mises said, “Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.”

What it Takes to Limit Government
If our Founders created a limited federal government under the Constitution that left the vast majority of responsibilities up to the states and the people, what has happened?

The tragic answer is that generations of Americans have not been holding elected officials responsible for their actions. They haven’t been appropriately replacing politicians who step outside their Constitutional boundaries. And government left to itself inevitably grows.

The Constitution is not the problem—it’s not causing today’s over-sized federal monstrosity. The problem is that the government isn’t obeying the Constitution—because We the People have shown we don’t care whether they do or not (it didn’t take politicians long to figure out that we’ll keep electing them regardless).

“If you have a government of good laws and bad men, you will have a bad government. For bad men will not be bound by good laws,” said Robert LeFevre. Ultimately, it is We the People who are responsible for the federal mess, because we haven’t held them accountable.

Today’s situation is perilous because over the centuries the American people have been lulled into complacency through freedom and prosperity, and have largely taken their eyes off civil affairs. Left to itself, the American federal government exploded into the modern massive behemoth of Washington, D.C.

The Swamp has not been drained—and won’t until obedience to the U.S Constitution is restored and hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats are sent home to look for real jobs. Downsize, eliminate, minimize. “That government is best which governs least.”

Only a vigilant citizenry can preserve their freedoms—by actively enforcing government to obey the law and stay within proper limitations. Only a watchful, active citizenry can enjoy protection, security, and prosperity—when it “binds them down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution,” as Thomas Jefferson said.

We the People are responsible for the actions of our government. It’s high time we spread the principles of limited government—so amazingly simple—so that we’ll be able to enjoy the blessings of good government for years to come.

The Silent Majority

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil,” said Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German pastor who actively opposed Hitler’s Nazi dictatorship during WWII. He was executed by the Nazis on April 9, 1945.

Such is all too often the cost of resisting evil that we of the dedicated minority face—and the Silent Majority looks on, refusing to choose sides.

Most of those in the Silent Majority don’t realize whose side they have chosen by not choosing. The Silent Majority is as culpable as the evil they refuse to fight. By allowing evil to win, the Silent Majority is—and always has been—an accomplice.

The Silent Majority hopes to live their lives without having to participate in the battle between good and evil that is as real and inevitable as death. Choosing to ignore reality doesn’t mean it ceases to exist.

The dedicated minority has two sides. As Tom Anderson used to say, “History, good and bad, has been made not by silent majorities, but by vociferous minorities. Whether we win or lose this titanic struggle for freedom depends on whether the dedicated minority working for what is right and good is more powerful and more effective than the dedicated minority working for what is wrong and evil.”

It can’t get much clearer than that.

Where does the Silent Majority come in on the fight?

Tom Anderson said, “The Silent Majority sat by and saw Him crucified. The Silent Majority permitted the reign of terror in the French Revolution. The Silent Majority watched as the Christians were burned at the stake. The Silent Majority sneered when Patrick Henry pled: ‘Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?’ The Silent Majority watched as the street demonstrations in Germany were taken over by a little unknown paper-hanger and corporal named Adolph Hitler.”

The Silent Majority, my fellow Americans, is right now allowing a socialist, criminal cabal to enslave the world through a one-world government.

The Silent Majority allows socialism, atheism, and immorality to be taught in our public schools—and sends their children there as well.

The Silent Majority has allowed the sodomite minority to force their trash down our throats to the point that my local library’s Teen Summer Reading Program is to “Read an LGBTQ novel.” Mary Calderone herself couldn’t have picked a worse topic for impressionable young teens to explore. And the Silent Majority looks on as Christians are persecuted for refusing to cater to the pervert-community.

The Silent Majority needs to stand up and begin fighting on the right side!

Jesus Christ didn’t tell His disciples, “Go ahead and live your lives. Be silent, be peaceful, and ‘coexist.’ Don’t worry about what the Other Side is doing; the victory is Mine on the final day anyway.”

Instead the Lord said, “He who is not with Me is against Me.” He said, “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”

The prophets of the Old Testament—great men of God like Elijah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel—were not silent—and they weren’t a majority. Standing before King Ahab, the prophet Micaiah was outnumbered by 400 prophets of Baal!

The prophets of God were persecuted, but they were rewarded by God. They did not live serene, peaceful lives, but they received the glories of heaven.

The minority dedicated to righteousness and justice—regardless of the cost—are the only ones who will inherit the Kingdom. As for the Silent Majority who play “churchianity,” pretend loyalty to country, and shirk responsibility, God will be less than pleased with them on Judgment Day.

Christ had a message for the majority: “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.” If the majority’s doing something, examine God’s standard and get on the right side: you’ll virtually always find yourself in the minority.

But the minority can win! And we will win, by God’s grace—with the help of a repentant Silent Majority who stop watching and get involved in the fight.

For the sake of your children, your grandchildren, your country, and your God: Please, get out of the Silent Majority!

Happy Independence Day!

1776 - 2017

Happy birthday, America!

241 years ago, with the signing of the Declaration of Independence, a free and independent America was born. The Founders pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors to the cause of freedom, and fought to defend American independence during a bloody war with the mighty British Empire–a war that lasted for eight long, difficult years.

Following the War for Independence, the Founders created a Constitutional Federal Republic that respects the unalienable rights of citizens and the sovereignty of states. Our American origins in freedom and morality are truly remarkable and unique in the history of mankind. Under our marvelous Constitution, America has enjoyed a greater amount of freedom and prosperity for a greater number of people than any system ever devised by man.

Let’s celebrate American independence today by remembering the sacrifice of the Founding Fathers and educating our family and friends about the principles of individual liberty and unalienable rights embodied in the Declaration of Independence!

🙂

Willie & the Little Sign

Note: This story is fictional.

* * * * *

No Guns

You may have heard of Willie before. . .but then again you may not, since Left-leaning media wasn’t keen on reporting this particular event. Just in case you haven’t heard of him, I’ll tell his story here.

Willie was a convicted criminal. He made his living by robbery. He had his trusty handgun, and he found that almost everywhere he went all he had to do was display his gun—clerks, cashiers, and customers alike complied with his demands. And he had no qualms about pulling the trigger when he deemed it necessary.

This lifestyle didn’t appear to bother him, and though he had served jail-time on multiple occasions, he was always back on the streets in a few months. He managed to elude capture in many situations when law enforcement officials tried to arrest him.

One time, however, he walked into a theater and demanded all the money in the till—a perfectly normal routine for him.

To his surprise and dismay, a movie-goer standing nearby calmly retrieved his own gun and aimed it at Willie.

The hardened criminal fled the theater and vowed never to go near it again.

What if I actually get shot next time? he thought as he grumpily marched down a rainy back alley the next afternoon. He was still quite jarred from his experience with the gun-wielding theater patron he had encountered the previous night. This is dangerous business!

It was indeed, but the next day Willie was back at his same old trade—he did, after all, need to eat, and he was willing neither to work for his bread nor apply for welfare.

After several more successful ventures, Willie’s confidence returned and he faced little if any resistance wherever he went, as before.

Then one day Willie entered the tiny convenience store on the corner and demanded all the money in the till.

This time the clerk herself was the one who badly surprised Willie by whipping her own gun out and pointing it at him.

“Move and I’ll shoot,” she said as she drew her phone from her pocket to call the police, but Willie was too quick and fled the way he had come.

Once more frightened, Willie became angry as he stalked up and down a distant alley and pondered the situation. He stormed and growled and would probably have shot anyone crossing his path. Luckily, no one did.

Willie decided he’d catch a ride on the train and move onto a newer, bigger city. He needed change, and besides, his hometown neighbors were arming themselves to defend themselves against his terrorism and robbery. Now they were succeeding—not him. And he hated it.

Accordingly, he moved on to the next town and began his devilish activities there.

He had only been there three days when he came across the most interesting thing he had ever seen.

It was small, and sitting in the window of a small toy store. It wasn’t a toy, however. It was a little white sign with a handgun symbol and a red strike-through circle.

Willie blinked and wondered if he was dreaming. This was a no-gun zone? A. . .gun-free zone! What a clever idea! I’ll bet some really clever crook thought of that one! he thought, and he wasn’t too far from the truth.

After several moments of silent, delighted reflection, Willie decided he would have to remember to look for more of those special signs.

At last he shrugged, chuckled wickedly, pushed the door open, and stalked inside the unsuspecting toy store.

* * * * *

Gun-free zones are not safe zones.

If liberals and advocates of stricter gun-control laws simply stepped into the minds of criminals (not a very far leap for them, after all) and looked at the world through the warped viewpoints of hardened burglars and murderers, they would realize just how lethal those little gun-free signs really are to innocent civilians.

If you were a crook, would you be likely to pick on a firearms shop, or would you prefer a “gun-free” establishment?

Truth is, criminals are already breaking the law by their very lifestyle. I can just see them entering a gun-free zone, snapping their fingers, and saying, “Guess I’ll have to leave my gun behind this time.”

The only thing gun-free zones do is prevent good guys from having firearms. Those signs proclaim to the criminally-minded, “Come try us out! You won’t find any opposition here!”

Next time you run into a gun-control freak, try asking, “Wouldn’t you like to put up a big sign in your front yard that says, ‘This house is proudly gun free’?”

I’d love to hear their response!