HE FOLLOWING IS MY SYNDICATED COLUMN THAT WAS PUBLISHED JULY 4, 2006. OBVIOUSLY NOT ALL OF THE PEOPLE NAMED THEN ARE LIVING AND/OR IN OFFICE TODAY BUT THE NAMES OF THE ELECTED POLITICIANS ARE INTERCHANGEABLE WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR NOT HAVING OUR BEST INTEREST IN MIND AND THEIR LEVEL OF CORRUPTION. AS I SAID, CHANGE THE NAMES I REFERENCED THEN WITH THOSE IN OFFICE TODAY AND THIS PIECE IS EVEN MORE PRESCIENT THAN WHEN FIRST PENNED SEVEN YEARS AGO.
John Kerry’s idea of freedom may be marrying uber-wealthy heiresses. Ted Kennedy’s idea of same has been to live off his gangster father’s bootlegging money. Howard Dean, D-Vt., Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., view freedom as bullying and intimidating any Democrat congressman who gets out of line (especially if he is black) and bashing the president at every opportunity.
To Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and John Murtha, D-Pa., freedom is comparing our military to Nazis, anti-Semitic jokes and accusing our military of the vilest crimes. To Lincoln Chaffee, R-R.I., Olympia Snow R-Maine, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, freedom is supporting liberal causes that are detrimental to the family. Harry Reid, D-Nev., finds freedom in his racist ad hominem attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas and obstructing the appointment of judges to the courts.
Terrorist Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the American Civil Liberties Union, People for the American Way (two oxymorons if ever there were any), Planned Parenthood, et al. find freedom in the courts, as they bastardize the Constitution, vilify America, and advance their agenda of debauchery and paganism. Then, of course, there are those who appear to view security as amnesty for illegal aliens.
But for many Americans, freedom lies in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution – as the framers of those founding documents originally intended. To us, the Fourth of July is more than just a picnic. It is a celebration of freedom from the extended governmental system (of the British government), which sought to control land, trade and with whom the colonists could trade, by telling them where they could and could not live – vis-?-vis the Proclamation of 1763 and the Quebec Act of 1774.
The British government imposed oppressive and odious tax policies – forcing the colonists to underwrite the cost of its standing army. Said policies included the Sugar Act of 1764, the Stamp Act and the Towshend Act of 1767.
Suffice it to say that these actions did not sit well with the colonists – just as the subversion of the Constitution by those referenced earlier should not sit well with us today. Just as the British Tea Act of 1773 made it apparent that a reasoned response was no longer an option for the colonists, the actions of liberal socialist elected representatives on every level – their disrespect and contempt for the Constitution, and their contempt for our military – should be the last straw for us.
No comments:
Post a Comment