Most wish to protect liberty in their voting but may not know how to do so. Media accounts of candidate activities and/or their public statements by themselves rarely give enough information to vote intelligently; and candidate debates, at least on the state, county, and city level, are poorly attended. One wonders if candidate charisma along with color, size, and number of signs displayed are not the most significant factors for most voters in making a selection. Sadly the rule of thumb is that he who spends the most money wins the election.
There are a few things you need to do in order to protect liberty with your vote. First formulate a philosophical base that should go far deeper than the rhetoric of a political party. My own base begins with my strict Christian background. Regardless of party or ideology, I want my public servants to emulate such solid values as honesty, integrity, morality, etc. I also would like to believe that when confronted with tough decisions they, like Washington and Lincoln, would not hesitate to ask God to illuminate their understanding.
Next, become immersed with the writing of our Founding Fathers as they have already traversed the same ground that we now tread and for the same reasons. Parliament was ever so ready to impose more rules and regulations upon them. The cause of the American Revolution was excessive government–consult any U.S. History text. Immerse yourself in the Constitution. Stay firm to it regardless of party ideology. Individual liberty cannot be maintained by straying too far from that document or from the collective philosophical base of that group of early patriots. Make their collective ideological base your own.
Their philosophical base consisted of many elements. Space permits my covering only two or three. They believed that governmental power should be limited and strictly defined in a contract with the people. (See U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 8; Art II, Secs 2-3; and Art. III, Sec. 2). Liberty lovers cannot support candidates who are ignorant of these limitations or who work to increase government influence outside these Constitutional parameters. Nor should tax monies be collected and spent outside these specific grants of power. When this happens, power flows non-stop to Washington D.C. and away from the states and the people. Once gone it is seldom returned. Have your federal candidates read Art. I, Section 8, and are they willing to live within those parameters?
State candidates must be aware of federal limitations, and must be willing to oppose federal intrusion even if bribed not to do so by federal grants. Are your state, county, and city candidates strong enough to “just say no” to the temptation to get “free” money to sell their authority? Career politicians almost always sell their “birthright” to stay in office. We must apply more scrutiny to them. Said another way: when considering a candidate for public office, does this person actively work to keep decision-making power as close to the people as possible—even if it is unpopular to do so—or is his usual answer to every governmental dilemma more government and more money to fund more programs? The latter candidate is sure to leave us with less freedom and less money.
Another basic premise of the Founding Fathers that is crucial to the preservation of liberty is that we should never elevate to a higher level of government that which could be resolved at a lesser level. In other words, the county should never assume as part of its governance load that which the city could and should do. Nor should the state assume the prerogatives of the county, or the Federal Government those of the state, county, or city. Those who make the decisions are less accessible, less accountable to local influence; and the program, now managed from hundreds or thousands of miles away, usually costs more because of less efficient management. This principle will also help with respect to propositions for those states that have them. In other words: Could this function be handled at a lesser level of government? If yes, then your vote should be no.
My last piece of advice is to remove from office as soon as possible those addicted to debt. China already owns 10% of us. Propositions are normally called bonds rather than debts to deceive the public who very likely would not support them otherwise. George Washington excused only war as a legitimate reason for debt. Education might be a second but my experience says that they too should wait for more prosperous times.
I hope this helps. We are indeed in trouble and need to return to our base to survive. Together let us bring better people to the front lines. Our liberty is at stake.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College.
The following is the Kern River Valley Tea Party Address, October 2, 2010, given by keynote Speaker Dr. Harold W. Pease
The 2nd American Revolution is upon us. This is one of hundreds of like-minded tea party gatherings this month held throughout the country urging all patriots to the front. You have answered this call. Those who sit this one out will condemn themselves to like leadership and enslaving taxation for years to come. You are doing this for your children and those not yet born. You must not fail them now. This is as serious as it was in 1776. The big difference is that we can do it in the ballot box. Please bring your friends and encourage everyone to vote for returning to the Constitution, which, if followed, limits government, ensures fiscal responsibility, and stimulates the free market.
In 2009 we gained the confidence of the people with over 2600 similar Tea Party gatherings–probably more demonstrations against excessive government in our lives than collectively in U. S. History. The establishment media sought to destroy us by first calling us “astro-turf,” then “mobs,” then finally “racist”—all intentional lies. It did not work. Instead, the public saw their dads and moms of all back grounds and color, rich and poor alike, demonstrating in the streets uttering words similar to those uttered by the Founders 234 years ago. The media, looking for conflict to discredit the movement, never found it. We beat the media. The public has confidence in us because we are they and they are we and the lies of the media lay exposed as did their roll as accomplices in the deterioration of our liberty. Only Fox news supported us.
We–YOU AND I– have become a source to be reckoned with as we return to our basics. The sleeping giant has awakened. We have the right message. We have the right leadership—each other. America desperately needs what we have to say before it is too late. This war is about liberty as it was in the past. Together, arm-in-arm, Tea Party Patriots and 9-12 Project members will return this nation to our core values. If we stay the course, political parties will mold their views around Founding views or self-destruct. Then we will have two good choices rather than, too often, no good choices.
We are tired of loosing our liberty. We will be the last generation to say we have liberty unless we return to the Constitution. Getting back to the basics, while there is still time is as vital to us as it was to the Founding Fathers. Because we have waited so long this election and every election in the immediate future is about your liberty. It’s no longer about liberal or conservative or even about party. It’s about how much more government can you have in your life or in your business and still honestly say you are free. When we return to the time tested principles of the Constitution, we will see great changes. Make your vote one for freedom, and prosperity will follow! Prosperity and jobs will return by: cutting taxes, cutting intrusive and stifling government regulations, cutting government spending and cutting the size of government. No other plan will work. The secret of liberty is housed in the Constitution, now read with renewed interest and respect.
Our vote November 2nd is but a battle in a long war. But getting new leadership that is respectful of our sacred documents and proven past is critical. Sometimes such cannot be found in either party. In our search for better leadership let us not overlook the local officers and propositions. It is not a silly question to inquire when they last read the Constitution. After all it is important enough that each must swear allegiance to it before taking office. If you are in doubt on an issue always vote for government closer to home. Never elevate to a higher level that which can be resolved at a lesser level. But at every level we need fighters armed with the principles of limited government and willing to confront higher levels of government–not self-serving career politicians as we now have.
California’s biggest problem is federal government intrusion! They have turned off our water starving our crops, tied our hands in facing illegal immigration head-on, imposed crippling environmental regulations on small business and confiscated 47% of the land mass of our state, making it unavailable for sale or productive income generating use, which could alleviate our enormous debt.
These problems can be solved by returning to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, which authorizes us to reclaim our power from the federal government and return it to the state. But we needAssemblymen and State Senators informed enough andstrong enoughto make this case. Have you asked your candidates how they stand on the 10th Amendment? Returning all functions not listed in the Constitution to state jurisdiction is our only hope. The Federal Monster is too big otherwise. Candidates who are too ignorant or timid to speak out on these issues should not get the vote of those who understand liberty.
In the First American Revolution there were three groups, each approximately the same size: loyalists, patriots, and the apathetic third. You have shown yourself to be patriots. Despite the efforts by the media and socialists and even the President of the United States to villainize our movement, we are more popular than either party by itself. We are now the majority and thus will return this country to the Constitution and liberty.
As a small boy I always believed, as does every young child, that I would have stood with George Washington and the other patriots. As a young man I realized that two thirds of the population did not and that a third actively opposed him. I then wondered if I would have been standing with him when most did not. I now am certain that I would have stood near him because today I stand for the same message. More importantly, I know that you would have done the same thing because you are here today. It is good to be among patriots.
The Battle of Lexington and Concord is about to be waged again and we need Paul Reveres riding through the cities of America to bring the voters in. There is hope. It is you. Your musket is your vote. Aim well. Liberty depends upon you.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College.
The following video describes the stunning painting by artist Jon McNaughton, which captures how our former presidents must feel about the direction in which our country is headed.
The concept of “anchor babies” refers to those whose parents are illegal immigrants into the United States and have a baby on this soil. That baby then inherits full citizenship and even the right later, as an adult, to sponsor his/her own illegal parents in their quest for citizenship. Is this practice Constitutional?
For the casual reader the amendment seems to validate such: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The debate for or against the practice of allowing citizenship for babies of illegals born in the U.S. rages on with virtually no one going to the source of the alleged authority—the crafters of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
Senator Jacob Merritt Howard, architect of the 14th Amendment, actually structured the Amendment (one of two defining the legal status of freed slaves after the Civil War, the other being the 13th which gave them freedom) to prevent that very interpretation. He said: “This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign minister accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.” It was he who insisted that the qualifying phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” be inserted into Section I. Those sneaking across our borders in the cover of darkness are clearly foreigners and thus specifically exempted from citizenship; the Constitution was not meant to protect those who are here illegally. Also notice the exclusion of babies born of ambassadors while here as well.
The record of the Senate deliberations on the 14th amendment shows this to be the view of the Senate. There is no such thing as automatic citizenship from this amendment without serious distortion of it. In fact, Lyman Trumbull, co-author of the 13th Amendment outlawing slavery, addressing the definition of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” asked, “What do we mean by complete jurisdiction thereof? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.”
Those crossing our borders illegally have jurisdiction or allegiance elsewhere and thus cannot have citizenship. How can a child of such a parentage have what his parents clearly do not have? How many are born illegally in the United States per year? Statistics are difficult to validate but the Pew Hispanic Center study estimated 340,000 in 2008 alone. If they in turn are used as sponsors for their parents in their quest for citizenship, such could be a million per year.
Citizenship was denied some of my ancestors and yours. Native Americans owed allegiance to their Sioux or Apache or Blackfoot or whatever Indian nations, and thus were not yet “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” of the nation they sought citizenship in. Certainly one must cease to be at war or conflict with the newly embraced country. This was not granted until 1924 when this requirement was satisfied.
Many of our Mexican friends send portions of their checks home to Mexico and plan to return to their native land upon retirement with pensions and/or social security sent to their “first” country from the country they extracted the wealth- us. Some vote in Mexican elections from here. It is indeed hard to argue that they are not instead subject to the jurisdiction of another land other than the United States- and most admit it. Unfortunately for them, the U. S. Constitution specifically denies such citizenship.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College.
