Do the Right-Wing Spin

It irks me when liberals add their own spin to a piece of legislation to drum up emotional support for a cause. I receive newsletters from groups such as Change.org, Townhall.com, and a host of others – both left and right – so I can keep myself appraised of the pulse of both sides of the political debate. I see so much spin from the left that it almost makes me nauseous. However, I do also see it from the right – and because of how irritating it is when I see it from liberals, it absolutely infuriates me when fellow conservatives do it.

This morning I got a “partner” email from Townhall.com. Public Advocate of the United States, an extremely social conservative, uber-right-wing organization, is calling on conservatives to fork over donations to help stop what they are calling the “Homosexual Classrooms Act.” That’s just their spun pet-name for it…it’s actually known as the Student Non-Discrimination Act, and PAUS is making some pretty obscene claims about the act.

Here is what they claim the Act will do, directly from the body of the email:

*** Require schools to teach appalling homosexual acts so “homosexual students” don’t feel “singled out” during already explicit sex-ed classes;

*** Spin impressionable students in a whirlwind of sexual confusion and misinformation, even peer pressure to “experiment” with the homosexual “lifestyle;”

*** Exempt homosexual students from punishment for propositioning, harassing, or even sexually assaulting their classmates, as part of their specially-protected right to “freedom of self-expression;”

*** Force private and even religious schools to teach a pro-homosexual curriculum and purge any reference to religion if a student claims it creates a “hostile learning environment” for homosexual students.

Here’s the rub: only one of those points has any truth to it at all, and that truth is miniscule. So much so that I am appalled that Townhall.com is supporting this “partner”.

The first three points are outright lies. I don’t appreciate being called a liar and I am careful about using the label unless I intend to accuse a person of deliberately misrepresenting the facts – or fabricating them entirely – in an effort to willfully mislead people to a false emotional conclusion. That’s exactly what PAUS is doing here, and as a gay person, I am beyond insulted. I am enraged.

If you go to the organization’s website (linked above), you see absolutely no distinction between different gay groups. There is no mention of the fact that there are gay conservatives out there who believe in family values, limited government and fiscal responsibility. We are simply referred to as “child perverting deviants”. The group was founded in 1981 by Eugene Delgaudio – and he’s been caught fabricating his talking points before.

But hard work is not enough. Items like mail, stamps, and even this email cost money.

That is why I ask you to make a generous donation after you complete the American Morality survey today.

One stormy night I drove to a mailshop hidden deep in a nearly deserted stand of warehouses. I’d heard something was up and wanted to see for myself.

As I rounded the final turn my eyes nearly popped. Tractor-trailers pulled up to loading docks, cars and vans everywhere and long-haired, earring-pierced men scurrying around running forklifts, inserters and huge printing presses.

Trembling with worry I went inside. It was worse than I ever imagined.

Row after row of boxes bulging with pro-homosexual petitions lined the walls, stacked to the ceiling.

My mind reeled as I realized hundreds, maybe thousands, more boxes were already loaded on the tractor-trailers. And still more petitions were flying off the press.

Suddenly a dark-haired man screeched, “Delgaudio what are you doing here?” Dozens of men began moving toward me. I’d been recognized.

As I retreated to my car, the man chortled, “This time Delgaudio we can’t lose.”

Driving away, my eyes filled with tears as I realized he might be right. This time the Radical Homosexuals could win.

You see, even though homosexuals are just 1% of the population, if every one sent a petition to Congress it would generate a tidal wave of two or three million petitions or more.

Hundreds of thousands of pro-homosexual petitions will soon flood Congress , and my friends in Congress tell me there’s virtually nothing on Capitol Hill from the tens of millions of Americans like you who oppose the radical Homosexual Agenda and the Gay Bill of Special Rights.

That was an exerpt of a very long fundraising letter sent out by Delgaudio’s group just one year ago – this wasn’t during the Clinton administration, this is the kind of garbage being mailed out today. There has never been anything like a “Gay Bill of Special Rights”. If there were, not one of the contributors on this site nor any member of GOProud would ever support such a thing.

Here’s the body of the bill he’s talking about. If you read all seven sections, you’ll find nothing about graphic homosexual sex acts being taught in sex-ed classes. You’ll see nothing about the introduction of lessons to experiment with the homosexual lifestyle, nor will you find anything remotely like it. You sure as hell won’t find a single word of law exempting GLBT students from punishment following claims of sexual harassment. In fact, the only grain of truth to any of these claims is the very last talking point. Delgaudio claims that private schools would be forced to take on these things, too. In fact, the only part of the entire bill that could possibly include private schools is a section that covers both public schools and “any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” That means any school in which students receive grants, loans or vouchers. A public school can refuse such things from the feds and bypass the whole mess.

Delgaudio also made an outrageous claim about the TSA after the agency released its hiring non-discrimination policy: “It’s the federal employee’s version of the Gay Bill of Special Rights… That means the next TSA official that gives you an ‘enhanced pat down’ could be a practicing homosexual secretly getting pleasure from your submission.” That’s not to mention the fact that the TSA official who pats me down might not be a straight man getting pleasure from feeling up my double-D rack. I suppose that would be perfectly acceptable to Delgaudio. Now, I don’t like the TSA and I think their powers to blatantly violate our Fourth Amendment rights are a travesty, but accusing them of all being gay? That’s not just a stretch. It’s absolute hysteria – the same kind that I point out in liberals when they claim that conservatives are all Nazis, bigots and hatemongers.

For the record, gay conservatives – like all conservatives – disagree with this legislation. We disagree with any overreaching federal power grab, and that’s all this bill is. It was defeated last year and will hopefully be defeated this year. As long as Delgaudio is so blatantly lying about it, however, he’s only making the liberal case for them on this issue. The states should be left to govern education as it is a power not specifically granted to the federal government.

We, as conservatives, are supposed to be above this petty emotional power play. It angers me to see groups calling themselves conservative and producing this kind of tripe. It angers me more to see legitimate conservative groups supporting them. Eugene Delgaudio is just two short steps away from being Fred Phelps. He’s no better than lefties who wish to bring this country down; he’s just using a different ideology to do it. I call on all conservative groups to distance themselves from this charlatan now, before his idiocy is used against us all in the coming election.

Delgaudio claims his work to be “for the family”. It’s how he signs all of his fundraising rants.

I only have one thing to say to you, Mr. Delgaudio.

Exodus 20:16.

Collective Salvation, Collective Guilt

Collective Salvation, Collective Guilt

As we stand one week out from the side-show of collective damnation which the Left engaged in over the Tucson shootings, it shouldn’t surprise all Americans that this is what they have witnessed.  The Progressive Left and, by default, the Progressive Right–the collectivists in both parties–operate off of the assumption that we are all responsible for each other collectively.  You will take notice there was not much condemnation from establishment “machine” Republicans against those falsely accused: Beck, Palin, the Tea Party.  Many in America have been bemoaning the fact that, for a long time, we have had no real choice in our political leaders.  Really…what choice was their between McCain and Obama; tyranny light and tyranny?  Many have speculated, including Glenn Beck, that had John McCain been elected, America would not have had the awakening it did in the form of the Tea Party movement.  Individual Americans, the public, outwardly reject the Left’s collectivism every time it is imposed upon us.  We swing back to the Right expecting that the Right will do something about the bloated government and instead all we receive in return is simple manipulation of the mechanisms the Left has already put in place.  Why?  Because Progressives in both parties operate off the same false premise of collective salvation rather than individual liberty.  Barack Obama was elected on a wave of “collective salvation.”  In fact, I would argue he was also elected on a wave of collective guilt hung around our necks by the accusatory Left, who, for generations have convinced Americans they are racist.  “Oh goody!  I get to alleviate my (supposed) racial guilt for voting for the black guy!  No matter what kinds of realistic evaluations tell me that he’s an Alinskyite Marxist!”  How could we possible expect the Right to shrink government when they hold the same basic premise as the Left–that it is government’s job to take care of people rather than protect rights.  Until the Right learns how to challenge the philosophical premises of the Left–they will continue, by default, to accept them.  The Left counts on this and plays the game by beating the Right over the head and shoulders with such words as:

You don’t want to help the poor, the sick and the infirm.  You’re hateful!

If the Right woke up and learned, philosophically, how to answer those charges on a conceptual basis, they could deflect charges like that as easily as Superman deflects bullets.  But, oftentimes they don’t–either because they are part of the game or simply because they are intellectually incapable of doing so.

I remember learning in high school about the “sphere of liberty” which surrounds each individual person.  Our nation was founded on the sovereignty and freedom of the individual precisely because it was collective ideas down through history which inevitably bring tyranny–aside from the “good intentions” of the collectivists.  All collectivists have good intentions, however, all collectivism is incontrovertibly tyrannical; whether it is a hard tyranny or soft tyranny makes little difference.  Ayn Rand states and Objectivists hold: 

Your intentions don’t count. If you are willing to believe that men should be deprived of all rights for a good cause — you are a Totalitarian…What is destroying all civilization? Just this one idea — that to a good cause everything can be sacrificed; that individual men have no rights which must be respected; that what one person believes to be good can be put over on the others by force.

Altruism is incompatible with individual freedom.  Unfortunately, these ideas of individual freedom were implicit rather than explicit in this nation’s founding documents and were left open to too much interpretation and false compromise.  This is why collectivists of all stripes have been able to corrupt the system.  You can’t continue to compromise with tyranny and expect to remain free.

To the Left, it is completely “rational” to accuse everyone who recognizes individual freedom as the standard for determining collective guilt for the shooting in Tuscon, Arizona.  Anyone who stands in the way of their imagined Utopia is precisely why everyone who values individual freedom is guilty.  Conversely, it is epistemologically sound to recognize that people are individuals, not cattle.  Even aside from being able to defend that view on a philosophical basis–which takes time and study–most people can recognize that it is inherently true simply by observation.  You are not completely free when living under your parents roof–under their rules and their terms.  The same thing happens when everyone is “taken care of” by government–government’s rules, government’s terms to exist.  You are not completely free to do as you please in whatever work environment you inhabit–you are subject to the conditions of your boss–even though contractually, at the time of hire, you may have come to certain mutual understandings, it is still their business.  Ultimately, the success or failure of that business is up to them, therefore, the boss and the boss alone is free to make the decisions he deems are in the best interests of the company.  We all have different talents, drives, desires and goals.  None of this can flourish when put under the yoke of collectivism.  No man of dignity and true self-esteem should be willing to allow himself to be enslaved by his government for supposed “security.”  Benjamin Franklin stated:

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Indeed, it is the ability for individual freedom to flourish which, I would argue, is the true representation of the “Utopia” the Left seeks to impose upon everyone through the force of law.  Imposing Utopia under the force of law is, in and of itself, a contradiction–if something is imposed under the force of law–it cannot, therefore, be considered “Utopia”–at least not to the particular group of people who is being sacrificed to make the other group of people “comfortable.”  Ultimately, someone has to sacrifice so someone else can live–that is the ultimate degradation.  It is the idea of exchanging, voluntarily, value for value, not sacrifice for value, which can uphold the true free-society unburdened by compulsion.  It is for this reason, that pure laissez-faire capitalism is the only political system which upholds individual rights.  Anyone who upholds any other system or “mix” of systems–is not upholding the tenets of individual rights and freedom.  There can be no compromise on basic principles.

This display of desperate malignancy by the Left has certainly given Americans a glimpse of what people turn into when they are consigned to collective societies.  They become animals.  Since everyone is collectively responsible, everyone is collectively guilty.  Therefore, you get growing numbers of pressure groups willing to feed off of and fight each other for the scraps which the benevolent collectivists get to hand out.  Why?  So the collectivists can satiate their need to cry their benevolence to whatever secular or theological powers they feel commands them–whether it is their emotions or their God.  In some cases, it really is simply a lust for political power one man seeks to hold over his brethren.  It breeds a society of contempt, jealousy, and malignancy–exactly the opposite of what the Left and Progressive Right’s stated intentions are.  The principle I am outlining here is the Marxist creed of “from each according to his ability to each according to his need.”  Ayn Rand addressed this hopelessly illogical and contradictory creed in Atlas Shrugged in her “story within a story” about The Twentieth Century Motor company.  You can find an excerpt at my Facebook page here

Love of our brothers? That’s when we learned to hate our brothers for the first time in our lives. We began to hate them for every meal they swallowed, for every small pleasure they enjoyed, for one man’s new shirt, for another’s wife’s hat, for an outing with their family, for a paint job, on their house–it was taken from us, it was paid for by our privations, our denials, our hunger. We began to spy on one another, each hoping to catch the others lying about their needs, so as to cut their ‘allowance’ at the next meeting. We began to have stool pigeons who informed on people, who reported that somebody had bootlegged a turkey to his family on some Sunday–which he’d paid for by gambling, most likely. We began to meddle in one another’s lives. We provoked family quarrels, to get somebody’s relatives thrown out. Any time we saw a man starting to go steady with a girl, we made life miserable for him. We broke up many engagements. We didn’t want anyone to marry, we didn’t want any more dependents to feed.

The collectivist’s damnation of everyone who seeks to uphold individual freedom is also a mockery of justice.  If everyone is collectively responsible–and everyone is collectively guilty–then there are no such things as “criminals.” Why have a legal system?  It’s amazing, isn’t it, how all these things when presented come together to form a coherent whole?  It’s not so mysterious anymore why the Left always seeks to uphold criminality and a depraved society void of all human virtue.  In fact, why even attempt to uphold the ideal of a government subordinated by society to moral, objective law?  Let, anarchy and tyranny (two sides of the same collectivist coin) commence!

You scream loudly to me that you are not collectively guilty of the shooting in Tuscon, America?  Well, then–I think it’s about time we get to kicking some serious collectivist ass, in both parties.  Don’t you?  If not, you better get used to liking and living with your collective guilt–because that is the damnation that awaits all of us if we don’t.

Liberal History Lessons

I couldn’t decide which I wanted to post more about, so I’m writing about both (and neglecting other important tasks at the moment).

I had a very interesting conversation with a liberal who thinks I have lost my mind. She is one of the many who can’t understand why I’d be conservative when so many liberals believe that all conservatives are anti-gay hatemongers. If that were the case then Ann Coulter would have refused to appear at Homocon last week. But, I digress.

Republican Congressional candidate Rich Iott was recently snapped with friends wearing a Waffen SS uniform. Several liberal outlets immediately jumped on it, and liberal commenters went completely monkeynuts over the photo. They screamed bloody murder about how he’s a racist and his opponent, incumbent Democrat Marcy Kaptur, has seized on the story. Nobody noticed the friend standing right next to him in a Scottish military uniform from WWII – and liberals refused to believe the truth. Iott was, for several years, involved in several organizations that re-enact historic battles from all of the wars that the US has been involved in. Iott has uniforms from both sides of nearly every war.

The liberal I was talking to said, “I don’t see why people don’t choose wars that aren’t over racist, ethnocentric issues. Why not do reinactments of World War I, where it was more of a war just to demonstrate all their cool new weapons.” (BTW, all comments from this person are cut and pasted directly from the conversation itself.)

I couldn’t understand the shallowness of the comment, and I let it be known. She told me I was rude and said, “I was in AP European and U.S. History. Yes, I’ve learned it. Considering the fact that all Arizona high schools require you to take both World and American history in order to graduate, you should know t…his. Unless, of course, you grew up in the stone age. I’m quite aware of why the Civil War was started. I don’t agree with any war re-inactments. See, in World War II, 12 million people died who weren’t actually a part of the war. That includes, 6 million of my ancestorage. Have you ever noticed that most people who engage in re-inactments are white people, usually not of a minority religion or ethnicity? Before WWI everyone had come up with nuclear weapons and “fun” new machinery. They were waiting for any excuse to go to war. Then Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated, who incidentally, most of the Austrian nobility didn’t want in power, it was an excuse to go to war. Some experts theorize that assassination was organized by the Austrian government, but I’m assuming you know that, since apparently you think you know everything. You seem to think I’m unaware of the connection with WWII. You do realize that anything that occurs has an effect, right?”

Okay…did you catch that? First she was upset because she felt Iott needed to find another war to do re-enactments of – one that was supposedly less “racist.” Then, she changed her tune and said battle re-enactments should NEVER be done. THEN, she says that BEFORE WWI, “everyone had come up with nuclear weapons and ‘fun’ new machinery.”

If this is what’s being taught in AP History in Arizona, then I have one more reason to move back to Texas.

The Civil War was, if nothing else, based entirely on racism. It was fought because the belief that blacks should remain slaves was so strong among some and the belief that they should be treated as humans was so strong in others that half the states tried to cede from the nation to defend what they felt was their right to keep slaves. When has there ever been a war fought that wasn’t based on some form of ethnocentricity? Even WWI was.

Then comes the remark about nuclear weapons. This is what much of her case is built on. I wrote a paper once about the use of nuclear weapons, so it’s a subject I know something about. I spent days poring over books on the subject. Here’s the basic history: radioactive elements were first discovered by Pierre Curie in 1898. Different parts of atoms were not discovered and laid out until 1911. In 1932, for the very first time, American physicists split an atom. The notion of an atom bomb was not considered until 1934, when Leo Szilard discovered the ability to cause a chain reaction while splitting atoms, though he hadn’t discovered how to actually do it yet. In 1939, nuclear fission was successfully discovered – that was the key to weaponizing the atom.

It wasn’t until July 1945 that a nuclear weapon was successfully detonated. One month later, two were actually used. The problem with her argument is that WWI ran from 1914 – 1918…long before nuclear weapons were even tested.

She’s not the only one who needs a history lesson. Just a couple of days ago, Sarah Palin warned her Tea Party supporters that the election isn’t over – “don’t party like it’s 1773” until the District is owned by conservatives, she warned. Within minutes (I’m pretty sure you can set your watch by the liberal responses to Sarah at this point), the liberals were guffawing joyously. DailyKOS writer Markos Moulitsas, former State Department employee Matt Ortega, PBS airhead Gwen Ifill and wine critic Steve Paulo all piped up on Twitter to mock Palin’s remark. They forgot their history, too – Paulo even said, “WTF happened in 1773?!”

Well, on December 16, 1773, colonists angry about taxation without representation boarded ships in Boston Harbor and dumped entire crates of tea overboard. She was referencing the original Tea Party – at a Tea Party Express tour stop. Oops.

There’s more to the Tea Party than liberals like to acknowledge, too. In 1698, British parliament gave the East India Company a near-complete monopoly on importing tea. Several foreign companies sold it in the American Colonies; but in 1721, the British crown passed a law requiring the Colonies to ONLY import tea from Britain. With the EIC paying a 25% tax to the crown on all imported tea, smuggling tea from Holland became popular – it provided much lower prices for tea lovers. In 1767, parliament passed the Indemnity Act, refunding that 25% tax to the EIC to drive prices down on tea sales in Britain; at the same time, they enacted the Townshend Revenue Act, which imposed greater taxes on several goods in the American Colonies. This went well for some time, providing competition for the tea smugglers. Then, in 1772, the Indemnity Act expired. Parliament brought back a lower tax against EIC, a 10% tax – but EIC passed this rise on to the consumers, and with the rise in price tea sales took a stiff nose-dive. The EIC didn’t stop importing the stuff, though, and ended up with a massive surplus of tea that nobody had the money to buy; this caused a crisis of mass proportions for the EIC. They were arguably Britain’s most important company; the country depended heavily on the East India Company (are we seeing the parallel yet?).

The EIC tried to have both the new post-Indemnity Act taxes and the Townshend Act taxes repealed, but parliament believed it would be viewed as a weakness and refused. After several possibilities were eliminated, the EIC managed to worm a different deal out. Parliament passed the Tea Act, which stopped the 10% tax entirely. It also allowed the EIC to directly import tea to the Colonies (previously they had been required to sell tea at wholesale only in Britain, where other companies shipped it to the Colonies, creating higher costs for the EIC). Parliament also kicked up the tax on this surplus tea, a tax to be paid by individual colonists rather than merchants. As the Townshend tax was meant to allow parliament to pay colonial governors and judges in an effort to keep them loyal to Britain rather than accountable to colonists, parliament refused to back down. The Boston Tea Party was considered the shudder that started the avalanche. Sound familiar?

I certainly hope we all have a better understanding of history now.

If Everyone Cared

Today, SSgt. Tom Rabjohn was laid to rest here in Arizona. His memorial was held at the same enormous NW Valley church where we honored Tony Holly just two and a half years ago. Rabjohn was deployed with his National Guard unit to Afghanistan in April of this year. On October 3, as he was defusing a roadside bomb, he noticed a sister device about to go off. He managed to get everyone else away, and paid with his life.

He was also a Phoenix Police officer.

One of his best friends eulogized him by saying, “he put his trust in Colt, Glock, Jeep, Keystone Beer, Toby Keith and Nickelback.” I didn’t know him well, but I saw what kind of officer Tom Rabjohn was while on duty myself, and after the first time I met him, I was always glad to see him on the street.

He served his country and believed in his mission. He was in EOD–Explosives Ordinance Disposal/Detection–and his job was to do exactly what he was doing that day in Afghanistan. I’m sure if we had talked to him about what he believed, he’d have said what every other soldier, police officer, and public safety worker always says: that he wants this world to be a better place, but he has no delusions that it will come without sacrifice. He paid with his life, and his wife and three daughters lost the center of their entire world. They paid, too, whether they meant to or not.

The song “If Everyone Cared” by Nickelback is one of my favorites. The chorus goes, “if everyone cared and nobody cried/if everyone loved and nobody lied/if everyone shared and swallowed their pride/then we’d see the day that nobody died.” It’s a truth those of us who are capable of love wish more than anything we could make reality. And though I didn’t know him well, I can say with confidence that SSgt. Rabjohn likely wished with all his might that he could make it reality.

But the coldness of the reality we all live with every day, the reality I see etched in the lines on the faces of the police officers, firefighters and EMT’s I work with, is far crueler than most people will ever be willing to accept. The majority of the population only knows the dramatizations that they see on prime-time television. Many will never be directly touched by the evil in this world, a fact that may be a double-edged blade. While I’m glad that our society is still holding on to right and wrong somewhere deep in our psyche, it seems that most of those who want to ban guns, stop all wars, and believe that utopia is attainable are often those who have never experienced the deepest darkness that a human being can experience.

Tom Rabjohn loved his country. Despite what so many Americans are unwilling to accept about Afghanistan, he served with distinction. And while here at home he served our city with a quiet dignity that those who are quick to cry “police brutality” will never believe. If everyone cared, we would never have to see a sight like the one that left a hole in the City of Phoenix today–that of a good man being laid to rest, having died a true hero to help save us from the evil that so many refuse to believe exists.

Thomas Rabjohn, PPD badge #7803, you did a good job. I promise we won’t let you down. And to Nikki Rabjohn, and Kylee, Koree and Kelsee, our hearts are with you. I know none of us can never wish more than you that this world wasn’t the place where Tom had to face evil so we didn’t have to.

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death

“Let justice be done though the heavens should fall.” –John Adams

“They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.” –Benjamin Franklin

“In politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.” –Alexander Hamilton

“Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall become wolves.” –Thomas Jefferson

“How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation?” –James Madison

“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” –Thomas Paine

“Honesty will be found on every experiment, to be the best and only true policy; let us then as a nation be just.” –George Washington

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! –Patrick Henry

Today, America, my country, is two hundred thirty-three years old. Some historians argue that the Fourth of July is an arbitrary date, since the Colonies had been at war with the British for nearly a year by 4 July 1776. In reality, Thomas Jefferson wrote of 2 July 1776 as the day future generations would remember and celebrate, as that was the day the Continental Congress officially voted to ratify the Declaration of Independence. But it wasn’t made public until two days later, which is why we still celebrate the Fourth today.

Despite lack of rations (food), proper clothing, equipment and, in some cases, training, thousands of colonists stood up more than two hundred thirty years ago to tell the British to shove it and go home. Despite failure after failure, they picked themselves back up, bandaged their wounds, and said, “hey! Is that all you got? Get back here, we ain’t done yet!” Every single man who signed the Declaration of Independence lost his whole life; he lost his wife, children and land, saw his house burned to the ground, his brothers hung or set before a firing squad, his reputation destroyed by government labels of traitor and murderer–and STILL stood for what he believed was right. Every single man.

It wasn’t perfect, but they fought. They knew well that the country they were founding would be a place for all people to find freedom. They even fought each other over the wording of the document that we hold so dearly today to ensure that we, in this generation, would still be free. The politicians of this generation, however–most of them, anyway–would have absolutely no ability to sacrifice what our forefathers did. When faced with the prospect of losing anything our politicians today tuck tail and run. They’d rather pass the loss on to us.

Too many people are absolutely clueless as to what was given and the price paid so that we could live our comfortable lives now. Maybe the lack of proper education in American history is what makes the current generation so apathetic. Maybe they’re just too comfortable. Whatever the reason, we cannot afford now to remain immobile. Take the time to educate yourself. We’ll never figure out where we’re going as long as we forget where we’ve been.

“I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” –Thomas Jefferson