Additional Pages

Thursday, October 27, 2011

The Gospel of Liberty

Mountain Top Patriot left a comment on "We Can Afford To Be Normal No More" that was particularly informative, as most comments on this blog, but it expressed an idea I just had to write about the Gospel of Liberty. Think about that for a second. Who are the apostles of liberty? Are you one? Why not?

If you think about it, it inspires a devotion not unlike religion where you know a thing to be true that cannot be proved one way or the other. Liberty is good, it feels good to do as one pleases without hindering the liberty of another. It is an expression of the liberty God intended for us that we have hardly ever been able to maintain, because we get greedy and want more and more until we inevitably encroach on other's liberty. Once we have learned to take liberty from others to extend our own, we lose it completely because there are always those who are better at taking it than those who simply want to maintain it.

This is why conservatives lose a lot of battles with the liberals, the collectivists, who see liberty as a means of avoiding social responsibility. I disagree with that in every way, but it is the way they see it. Their concept of social responsibility equates to making their fetishes acceptable so they don't have to suffer the scorn of society, this they equate to religion whether that equation is valid or not. So, in their minds they have to destroy the church and the social responsibility guided through it by means of voluntary tithing to re-route that money through their government budgets.

The concept of a Gospel of Liberty is a direct refutation of their assumption that social good can only come from government power. Whenever a conservative thinks of social responsibility they think of the charities they support through so many religious or secular causes to which they are devoted. When a liberal thinks of charity they think of welfare and food stamps, but also support for gay-day parades, bike paths and other public works that support their vision of Gaia. They have, whether they like to think of it, or not, rewritten the Gospel to exclude God. Theirs is a gospel of dependence and extracted tithing rather than liberty.

So, what is the Gospel of Liberty?

The Gospel of Liberty, to me, is the promotion, the devotion to the values of liberty that have been lost these last centuries since the American Revolution. The American Government has been so devoted to governing, controlling, regulating action that it has forgotten that its purpose was to protect individual liberty. Liberty is no more in America. It will remain so until we become adamant about it, until we become apostles of liberty and spread the gospel of liberty with the zeal of the religion.

Saturday, October 15, 2011

We Can Afford To Be Average No More

There are a few bigger things afoot than most are thinking about right now. Occupy Wall Street is nothing other than a show of force. I know I have mentioned this in a previous post, but it is becoming clear enough that some of the bigger bloggers are starting to realize it. I think a lot more people than that are coming to the realization that this is just the sort of thing a Community Organizer does so well.

Why the rich? What did they ever do to any of the punks down on Wall Street, or any of the other locales around the nation, other than give them their jobs, or pay for their college, or welfare? What the rich did was become the latest boogieman for the Obama Administration. They are the targets and the fools (the rich) have so far refused to support the only means of keeping them from being dragged from their mansions and brutalized by a mob of frantic Obamatrons and the useful idiots of George Soros.

In Denver a man was heard to say “F---- Rush Limbaugh” so that the audience of the local station carrying his program could hear it. He got close to the microphone to make that declaration. Why not “F--- George Soros? Soros has more money than Limbaugh, he has more clout and has been even convicted in France of insider trading. What has Limbaugh done? He has been a target of people like Soros, who use these dinks like un-thinking drones sent out to do as much damage to American society as they can.

I know as sure as I am writing this that one of the Soros drones who troll the internet for mention of his name to then propose writing a guest post on blogs such as this one ostensibly to merely comment on the post under false pretenses. The idea, for them, is to turn it all around and back on the accuser. I say this because it has happened to ME with remarkable certainty in the past. They don’t ever read the piece, they just want fair time on my blog, but it is mine. Troll on little drone.

A recent post, We Are Way Behind, tried to make my main point, but I am being a lot more direct about it. Anarchy, civil unrest and/or chaos is, under the Patriot Act, a reason to take all sorts of emergency actions, one of which, I am willing to bet at this time, is a suspension of elections until the order can be restored. Another blog pointed this out at about the same time I came up with We Are Way Behind. No, I am not linking it, I am not interested in that sort of self-promotion, or I-told-you-so’s.

The things that are out of control of the Obama Administration are the Gunwalker and Solyndra scandals that threaten to rock Obama’s presidency at about the same time he wants to unleash this “October Surprise”. Read anything you want, Cloward and Piven, history of the Russian Revolution, or the manner and means that Adolph Hitler came to power in Germany. It wasn’t all Jew bashing, it was a manner of creating a small group of dedicated men willing to do violence to the opposition. The means of taking control of a nation and people are known, not just intimated. They are scientifically calculated to do exactly what is necessary to step into the void at just the right time to seize control.

How long did it take to have union muscle bolster the ranks of the protesters? How long did it take for anarchists to appear on the scene as an ironically organized force to push the cops to arrest them? Is there anything other than fawning support of these rascals from the Democratic Party?

Look, I’m no conspiracy theorist, but I am a student of history. One might ask how a cultured, sophisticated society as that of Germany accepted Adoph Hitler. How was that possible? Many times it is the mere fact of sophistication that gets these willing dolts (the average Democratic voter,) to support whatever criminal and unconstitutional acts their leader might devise simply out of some devotion to their principles. It is not just enough for these morons to do wrong, they have to get the entire population to pay for their excessive good-intentions. To answer the question, the German people simply accepted the person who appeared to be in control. Control is not necessary, in Hitler’s case it was only the appearance of control, enough to brutalize his opponents and have a few organized brown shirts ready to step in with the correct message.

Am I comparing Obama to Hitler? If you must, but you would be missing the point. The point is: ANYONE with the organization or the ability to co-opt an organization with the muscle to put down the initial revulsion and resistance, can, at the right time, especially in economic desperation, seize control of ANY nation and the more sophisticated, the easier it is. While the Democrats with all their media might and their pop culture support might puff and blow about the absurdity of the comparison they are abetting the possibility by denying the possibility.

This is a dangerous time. Who will go into the streets to confront that organization? Who will be the resistance strong enough and willing enough to overwhelm them? Would you? Would you know the right time? When is that time for you? Is it the suspension of elections? You had better know, because if you expect me to sit around worrying about when the elections will be held, you will be looking at my back. I have confronted these morons at numerous town-hall meetings and Tea Party rallies. In Denver, I got one of them to jump at me, but his comrades seized him and pulled him away.

Since 2009 I have seen this plan slowly develop and have marveled at the way the Tea Party refused to see themselves as the resistance, afraid of being labeled “violent”. I have been way ahead of them on that point. I recognized that the unions, for Obama, were nothing other than brown shirts used effectively to blunt the message of millions of average Americans. We can afford to be “average” no more.

I broke from the Tea Party for this very reason. There is a time when force must be met with force. There is a time when muscle must be used against muscle. Yes, this means bloody noses and severe beatings, if you can’t take it; you can’t afford to be an American in the times going forward.

Now, if this eventuality never occurs, fine. I’m just trying to point out that if you will allow Barack Obama to suspend elections for any reason whatsoever without violent response you might as well put on the striped pajamas and wait for the train. I never will.       

Monday, October 10, 2011

No Glory In "Old Glory" Any More

Take down your American flag and fly instead the Gadsden Flag. The once glorious American flag flew for the representation of the Constitution and the union that resulted from its adoption. It stood as a victory of the people over government, as a statement of the changing of the old order. It was a victory against the oppression and clever device of the State. It spit in the eye of the old dictatorial monarchy it replaced. It was a symbol of pride to those who flew its colors and proudly asserted themselves as Americans. But, Americans we are not, not in the sense that caused us national pride, not in the sense that it was intended. We have become servants to a bureaucracy that has supplanted our nation with rules, regulations and Supreme Court decisions. If a nation is made up of laws, it is destroyed by the laws that violate its charter.

To be an American now, one must look beyond the flag to the very substance of what Americans became when they drafted the Constitution and recognized those rights gained as the very soul of citizenship. We are not citizens to a bureaucracy; we are not citizens to a system of plunder; we are not citizens to a printed list of demands and consequences. Laws are not made up by us, for us, they are the products of lobbying efforts, exclusions offered in return for campaign contributions. Our republic is lost.

If we take down our American flags we would vacate the space between capitals and the seats of government and then the flag would fly only over those buildings and committees who have so stridently sought our subjugation. We would know them all by their adherence to the methods of confiscated liberty. The American flag would then come to stand for what it should symbolize, the success of the state over the individual. The power and the might of the state against the people.

I look at the American flag now with the sentiment with which it originally flew, when it inspired the words of Francis Scott Key. I place my hand over my heart, or salute it for what it once meant, for what it was intended to stand for: a beacon of freedom in a world of oppression, but I know this sentiment as an illusion I afford myself on patriotic days. I can no longer regard the flag of today as that of the original.

I ask you: Are we the same; is the nation the same; do our hearts still beat with the ardent patriotism that rises tears to our eyes when we see it? Or, has it become a symbol of too many abuses, too many affronts to veterans and citizens alike? When the power of the state can and will take everything one has to satisfy its demands for tribute, are we free?

If the flag stands for freedom, are you free? They will take your money from your account on a whim and return it only when you have paid all you own to prove your innocence. They will take your life if you challenge their power and might. They will imprison you for failure to pay the taxes levied on you in your absence, without an opportunity for rebuttal. There are stories upon stories of people who have been dealt with summarily by the government. They do it with the power of YOUR consent. Yours, the veterans, the citizens, the voters, the taxpayers. Is it your will that this would be done to your neighbor? Is it your will that this would be done to you?

I ask: what can the state not do to you, if it takes an interest in doing so? Do you know? The answer is: Nothing. It has police to enforce its insider laws, judges and juries to read only the most damaging evidence, disregarding any mitigating circumstances. You are a revenue stream, nothing more. If you refuse that role on whatever legitimate grounds you can find it is irrelevant to the fact that you are not paying them their tribute. No other fact holds sway.

Nothing has given me more pride over the years than to see that flag wave against a clear blue sky. It stood as a symbol of what was and could be again, but farther and farther we go down the road toward the most oppressive and belligerent society. We find that our laws are not designed to protect the individual from the state, but the other way around. I have lost none of my regard for those founders and patriots who suffered through the winters of our birth as a nation. It is, in fact, in tribute to them and their struggles that I suggest we not endorse the perversion of their dreams, but break out ourselves and with their spirit and their bravery chart a new course away from the machinations of the all-powerful state.

Then, once we have secured glory for the United States and again set it right on the path to liberty and freedom in adherence to the power of the Constitution, we dedicate the American flag to our struggle, to our victory and hoist those colors once more. In pride. 

If you think it is just me, Brock Townsend offered this link below, but I thought it appropriate to read.

Saturday, October 8, 2011

Mindless Self-Destruction

According to the Kirsch Foundation there was no charitable giving prior to 1900. Instead, alms were given directly to the people in need from other individuals. It wasn't until the rise of the industrial revolution that the idea of charitable foundations began to give funds for hospitals, libraries and museums. Why is that? It is because capitalism had allowed the concentration of wealth and with it the ability to do big things from a single source.

I don't know which is better, or worse. Is it better for each individual to seek out those in need and give of themselves to someone directly, or for the formation of concentrated wealth to seek out opportunities to do bigger things? I suspect that each might operate at the same time. So, the concentration of wealth and therefore the ability to do bigger things while individuals continue to devote resources to individual cases seems one of the best systems. It is a system that rose out of the combination of Christian values and capitalist methods.

Lately, however, it has become the fashion for those who have concentrated wealth unto themselves to use the power of giving to do social engineering. It is called "Venture Philanthropy" and it is designed to create organizations that are self-sustaining to largely support local non-profits. They seek to do community-minded outreach. Decode that and what you get is that they are largely supplying the funding for social engineering. A large part of this process is to attract and utilize government grants and lobby governments to provide or initiate things like "enterprise zones".

I believe everyone ought to give to whatever charity they desire. I endorse any one's right to do whatever they choose with their money, where I have a problem is where these "Venture Philanthropists" use their clout, their economic might, to absorb all of the public funds and direct them toward their particular point of view, or ideology. Public funds are tax dollars, our money, being directed toward organizations and goals that we do not support. Build a hospital, or a library and everyone might be served by that, but if one devises an organization to lobby for, or out-compete, for public funds to support Planned Parenthood, which is really sort a planned abortion clinic, I don't think that is a legitimate use of those tax dollars.

If those funds are designed to limit the marketplace by organizations determined to keep Wal-Mart out of a given area, that also is a poor use of those funds and what is more important is what other good causes are not being served in the process? Small groups do not have the talent available to write a winning grant proposal when the competition is assembled by Bill Gates or Steve Jobs (RIP). Often, a faith-based non-profit cannot get funding from government or any left-wing organization. They are being starved out of effectiveness. It was told to me openly that an organization I supported, were it not faith-based, would have secured funding from a large tech company. I knew the person awarding the funds and knew this to be a fact.

I bring this up only to point out that the war has been being waged on every front imaginable for a long time. There is an assault on religion by the government and now industry. A distancing from Christian religions has been taking place for a long time. It is not politically correct to have a business make considerable donations to any faith-based organization for fear that the radical left will seize upon it as some unholy alliance that needs to be exposed and demonized. (odd that those words so accurately depict the situation)

In Africa, the war is being waged between Christians and Muslims over water. In a given village a Christian organization might drill a well and open it to the public. In another village a Muslim organization might drill a well and the only price to be paid to partake of the water is a conversion to Islam.

In all sectors Christianity is under attack and that might not bother the atheists in my readership, but this new philanthropy is not only directed at Christians, it is directed at the Western culture that made all of this charitable giving possible to begin with. When I see the dolts down at OWS, I see a group of useful idiots. The problem is they are idiots, but useful to those intent on bringing down the Western culture in order to supplant it with whatever form of fascism one chooses to fear.

To me, it is all one in the same. Christianity and the principles behind it drove the expansion of Western culture and while there are some moral bumps along the road, overall, when one looks back along the path of social advancement, it has done a lot more good than bad. Yes, there have been zealots who took the word of God and used it as bludgeon on other societies, but what is largely ignored is the society it encountered. Now, without going into a dissertation on Western culture and the benefits of it to the people and societies it tamed, let me just say that a little research would do one good before pointing to the Inquisition, the conquering of the West and the Salem Witch Trials as the only talking points one has.

The point I am struggling to make here is that as a Constitutionalist I see the enemy to my rights standing proudly to deny them through some concept of Utopian "fairness"; as a Christian I see my religion under attack for no other reason than the beliefs guaranteed to be sacrosanct by that same Constitution; and as a capitalist I see my values under attack by open, ardent socialists communists. The fact is, all of these things are under attack by the same groups and people and for often mis-guided, muddled reasons they can't even articulate because they are the useful idiots of a much more sophisticated force: the State.

When I see Barack Obama giving an encouraging wink to those willing to destroy the advancements of the Western culture for their own sheer, mindless satisfaction I see how well prepared the opposition is and can only pray that when push comes to shove there are more people willing to support it than is obvious to me now.   

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

What Banner Do We Fly?

Let us, as an exercise, examine our inaction. We will not harass or bother the justices of the Supreme Court, who routinely betray the intent of  the Constitution because we will be thrown in jail. We will not stand up for liberty at the airport because we will be detained, miss our flight and perhaps be thrown in jail. We will not cause a ruckus in the House of Representatives because we will be thrown in jail. We will not attempt to interfere with the FED because we will be thrown in jail. We will not fight back against the unions because we will be thrown in jail. We will not fight back against the banks because we will be thrown in jail. We will not refuse to be pulled over at a DUI checkpoint because we will be thrown in jail. We will not refuse to pay taxes as a protest because we will be thrown in jail.

The problem with being thrown in jail is the sudden lack of income attendant to that action. The need for a lawyer, with the sudden demand on the income attendant to that action. We don't want to wind up in some inner-city jail where life would not be so pleasant. Jail presents a risk to our employment and consequently a sudden drop in income.

So, the truth of the matter is that we do not resist because we cannot find a way to do so that will not adversely affect our other lives, the ones where we are fathers and mothers or otherwise responsible adults. We don't want to be homeless. We don't want to suffer or make our children suffer.

Now, I could make all of the reasons that suffering is becoming a fact with or without resistance, but I'll let that go for now and just focus on our inaction.

I believe that most of us would risk one or more of the above actions if there were to be some outcome to that sacrifice, but we all know that it would be a (forgive the vulgarity) fart in the wind. It would have no effect and we would be no closer to our goals of liberty.

We are not the children of the revolution for so many reasons. First, the world is not the same as it was back then. It is nearly impossible to make a living off of the land. It is impossible to escape punishment by driving into the frontier where one might get lost. We are known the world over simply by having utilities in our names. Second, our lives are tied to our children. Our mistakes weigh heavy on them. Third and finally, there is no chance of winning.

As has been often lamented, there is no champion to embrace our cause and benefit from it. There is no one to take the political advantage we might secure and use it as leverage for our cause. The cause of liberty is a lonely pursuit. Everyone in the government is hurt by the advancement of the people's liberty and so none will come forward to accept our gifts and perhaps pardon us at some time in the future. There is no workable solution to the .gov control over our lives.

The Oathkeepers were supposed to be that link, that liaison that would mitigate our excesses for the cause of liberty, but they have abdicated their role. Also, we have no voice. The Tea Party will not support any act of aggression when that is the only option left to those who truly value liberty and would be willing to sacrifice for it. Those who know me know that I would gladly sacrifice and have and have been left standing in the cold for my efforts. It was a learning experience.

Where is the military? Where are the politicians needed to support our efforts? At least the Palestinians have support for their resistance, as misguided and irrational as it might be. What banner do we fly? What ground do we seek? What means will we use?

We are a movement without a leader. We have a goal without a means. We have a method without a plan. We are waiting for our sacrifices to have a meaning, otherwise any action we might take would be an isolated incident of a weak-minded individual (or so portrayed by those who write the news). We are smart enough to know this and we remain inactive.

Every mission is a suicide mission. A movement cannot function under that fact. We are not terrorists, we do not think in those terms. We are not driven on by encouragement from a religious perspective. We are just men and women seeking to retain what was given to us at birth, that was robbed from us before being born. We have inherited a betrayal and we are pissed about it. We want to do something to secure our rights for ourselves and our posterity, but we see no cooperation, no possibility of success.

So, who are we, then? Are we an army without a general? Are we saboteurs? Are we Palestine? In the Palestinian struggle we find our most likely peer. We seek something that was never ours, that has been a myth almost since the signing of the document. We struggle with no possible chance of success, but we lack the courage to even throw rocks.

So what would it take to move us in the direction we need to go? What would be the catalyst that would unleash our intent? Before we can envision success we must first know how to begin, where to begin. That should be the question on every conservative blog, on every patriot's lips. Where is our beginning? Who will give their lives first? Who will be second? Who will be...on and on. We should know this first. We should work toward it, refine it, we should be able to say who will be first in action and when that action is taken, who will follow it up.

I suggest a summit of all interested parties to do just that. Sit down and devise a justification, produce a document, a letter of intent, a warning and ensure that those actions are followed up with a plan for resistance. Think it over.

Monday, October 3, 2011

We Are Way Behind

The way conservatives always get their butts kicked is that they rely on the persuasiveness of their arguments. They appeal to truth and fact and the irresistible force of logic. Liberals have no such illusions to hold them back. They know that everything they desire needs to be accomplished by deception, so they don't waste time on rational arguments but appeal directly to emotion to get the support they need. They do not even need to have everyone working toward the same goal as the intent is discontent. The snake, once moving, can be guided by the head.

I am not trying to make a case that conservatives are smarter than liberals, or more dedicated to the truth, we each have our own truths and liberals, I think, in terms of raw intelligence, are smarter than conservatives. One does not have to be very smart to put two and two together and arrive at four, but one must be brilliant to put two and two together and arrive at five. That sounds funny, but think about it for a moment. Their intelligence and the arrogance that comes from it allows them to completely re-work society in their heads and figure out a way to get what they want. All they have to do is be bold enough to lead the moochers and looters, to figure out a way to get them to align with their goals.

There is a dynamic at work in America right now that is frightening. Liberals have already worked out how to appeal to the moochers and looters. The leadership is in the White House with the power of the federal government behind it to supply the ground troops with the necessary funds to mobilize these mobs of angry, discontent moochers. We saw this at the Wall Street protest and others around the nation. They are flexing their muscles. Get the students and other moochers to create the diversion then sprinkle in some union muscle to do the hard work, to shut down opposition and you have a force close to the III% needed to make radical change.

We think of ourselves as that III%, but what if THEY are the III% needed to do the job? Have you considered that? Once they have mobilized, what will be our response? Really? All right, you have seen the exercises taking place, the marching in formation, the target practice taking place on our streets. You have seen the command and control. Their defensive positions are arrayed before you in police cruisers and TSA uniforms. The political groundwork has been established. The Tea Party has been complicit in its own ineffectiveness by a single word RACIST.

The strictly non-violent nature of the Tea Party has already removed them from the field of battle. What good is it to have 50 million cheerleaders afraid to support your cause?

Boys (and girls) we are in serious trouble. Van Jones and Barack Obama have scripted the eruption prior to the election. The resulting civil unrest (assuming we don't just roll over and allow it) will give them all the power they need to root us (the opposition forces) out and postpone elections until the civil peace can be restored, a thing never designed to happen. Graphic examples of handling these "domestic terrorists" will be televised so that all can see what happens to resisters.

The real trouble is all of us are sitting around thinking that when the time comes we will act, but we won't. I am convinced of that. I pray it were not true, but I have seen no willingness for the necessary forces to come into alliance that would prevent it. Without the threat of violence the Tea Party is a paper tiger. The III% community (and forgive me for saying this, it gives me no pleasure) cannot overcome its desire for propriety to take the necessary actions to present a real threat, to force its supporters behind it and shove the pretenders out of the way.

While the liberals are consolidating power behind the unions and student activists, the two major forces on the conservative side, the Tea Party and the III% community, are increasingly distancing themselves from each other. A political force (the Tea Party) is useless without an enforcement arm (the III% community). The Oathkeepers won't even be a factor.

Ultimately, we don't have the stomach for liberty. If we did, we would be holding our exercises in public, marching our troops HAND IN HAND and preparing for the conflict. We already know the battle plans of the opposition who seem intent on action around October, 2012 the traditional Soviet month of revolt. Poetic, ain't it? 

Saturday, October 1, 2011

It Is Liberalism That Has Failed the Blacks

I long for the days when men were men. I long for the days when this nation meant more to people than just a residence, just a job, just a position within their community. I long for a day when the promises of liberty were more than just words on marble monuments.

I don't think I am alone in this, but it vexes me that when I stand I stand largely alone. That when I lay down my life and treasure that only a few are willing to stand next to me and do the same with theirs. I can recount several over the Guardians of Liberty time, but where have they gone, what have they done since I have been surveilled, harassed by the IRS and lost my business? Have they moved the ball? I question not their willingness, nor their devotion to liberty, only their effectiveness. There are those, Kerodin and Pete and if you know those individuals you know that I hold them in great regard, that they are brothers in liberty. I have seen Mike pursue and take Gunwalker, along with the other Mike, to the very brink of catastrophic scandal that the Obama Administration so greatly deserves. I have seen others like Brock continue to beat the drum. There are many in the Second Amendment movement who do as much as they can to raise awareness and demand liberty, RTC (either one), Dudley from Rocky Mountain, Arctic Patriot, Alvie, Green Mountains Homesteading, etc, etc.

Do I have to name them all? We know who the action folks are, but where are the others? For so long we have hammered away at the wall of government, we have paid the dues of those who risk everything for liberty and yet there is little being accomplished. I am no better. After beating the drum with Guardians and the lack of accomplishment that organization produced I burrowed in and worked to make my world safe for my family. I ventured out and was distracted by my own pursuits. I will come back when needed, I tell myself.

I hear of Van Jones raising the stakes. The minorities will rattle the cages this election, which is code for intimidate white voters so Obama can be re-elected. Is this ultimately America? Is fear the true enemy of liberty? Do we sacrifice everything to save our skins, or do we pony up? Do we know what that means? Is it time for the racial minorities to overcome the largely white-dominated culture and if so, is that only possible through threats of violence? Look, if minorities seek to band together to accomplish something politically, what could be more American? But, if the implied threat is to another race, is that somehow noble? Minorities are often trampled in a popular election, that is just how it works, it is not racially motivated, it is a numbers game, it is a motivation game, but like so many Cinco de Mayo parades, it is a "sticking it to the man" mentality that pervades.

Were America the racially antagonistic place some minorities would like to project, there never could have been a President Obama. I like the fact that a black man has been president. I like the fact that as a nation we are capable of choosing our president based on eloquence, even, rather than race, that the Obama Administration has largely been a failure, even to his most ardent supporters tells one more about the man and his ideology than the color of his skin. The fact that he enjoys making his race a bigger factor than it has ever been shows the shallowness of his soul, not the legitimacy of his claim.

We are Americans and part of us are from a different race, that is a fact. But, we are all Americans. We select from Americans to lead us, regardless of race, or of ethnicity. I like Herman Cain, but blacks will call him every name they can to suggest that he is not "right," that somehow his views make him less black. I don't like Herman Cain because he is black, I like him because he is conservative and that most of his views are my views. Liberal blacks hate him because he intimates the unspoken truth that his color has nothing to do with his popularity among whites. It destroys the narrative that they have so carefully nurtured. He is proof that the racial factor is truly no factor in our decisions or our support.

I would like to see every race embrace the values and principles of the Constitution and I think blacks are being poorly served when they are asked to support Democrats on the idea that somehow they will deliver the spoils to them based on race. That is a cynical view of America that only liberals would advance, only those among us who do not see value in all that we have been through as a nation struggling with the evil of slavery over these many decades and now closing in on centuries. We cannot change the past, we can only seek to overcome the mistakes of our forebears and forgive me for believing we have come a long damn way from those policies and practices that ever allowed it. The truth of history is that America never wanted slavery, that is was imposed upon us by the British, who reaped great financial rewards in its employ by shipping and delivering those souls into bondage. I have read enough wills in my time to recognize that most slaves were given freedom. I know that at the time of the Civil War there were more free blacks in the South than in the North. But these are lost facts to those determined to keep the myth of racism alive.

There are racists. I do not mean to imply that there are not, but the ratio is minuscule. Obama is proof that we have put that issue aside and were he conservative, his policies would have worked and he would have already been hailed as one of our greatest presidents, not the successor to the Carter legacy. It is liberalism that has failed the blacks, not America.

Were this not true liberty would be on the minds of all races. Were this not true we would be brothers in arms to demand our rights and to stand aside one another as brothers against tyranny and oppression. The spoils of a great nation cannot be delivered unto one race or another, it must be earned by diligence in the pursuit of happiness, i.e. liberty. The label of racism is granted to anyone struggling against the power of the federal government as a reflex. But, even to proffer that insinuation is to admit that minorities are dependent upon the government and unable to stand apart from it, a racist declaration if ever I heard one.

Let not Van Jones be right, let us all seek liberty and aid those who are engaged in the fight this very day. Together we can reap the rewards of ambition, divided we are but a weak and unworthy people.