Opus 2025-275: Cornerstone Considerations: On Being Special

In two states mobs led by Democrat government officials have been obstructing the actions of law enforcement.  The events in New Jersey have been the main event focused on by the media.  It seems that certain politicians feel they are immune from prosecution because they are politicians.  Strangely enough they use this for support,

Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1

They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other place.

This is a very plain and straightforward statement.  It is true that it makes them immune from arrest while in Congress or traveling to or from.  That is clear.  What is overlooked is the exceptions for “treason, felony and breach of the peace”.  That also seems clear.  

What is just as clear is that congressmen going to a prison and attacking the guards as they urge on a mob is a “breach of the peace.”  It might also be a felony.

The problem we run into is when the courts start telling us what the meaning of “is” is.  As in so many other areas of law they twist it to say what they want it to say.  The obvious purpose of this clause is to enable members of congress to speak out, do their job and not fear arrest for doing their job.  Last I heard, New Jersey prisons are not on the way to congress.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-098: Society’s Debt

What does society owe us?  Does it owe us a job?  Does it owe us an income?  We have a generation coming up with seems to think that they deserve everything that life has to offer at no cost to themselves.  Actually, it’s probably more than one generation.  There are even elderly people who feel like they are owed a retirement from the government.  I don’t mean just a fair repayment of Social Security, but I mean a certain quality standard of living.

Of course, nobodys asking who’s going to pay for all this.

I am asking and not getting an answer, unless you consider crickets an answer.

I think the preamble of the constitution goes a long way towards answering this question.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Such phrases as “insure domestic Tranquility” fit in with the responsibilities the Constitution assigns to the Federal Government.  It makes you pause and wonder where the Feds are when Antifa is burning cities and illegal gangs are taking over apartment houses.  I guess I live in a Unicorn Land where the government reads its founding document.  Forgive me.  

Then you have the Declaration of Independence which brings up the the concept of the “Pursuit of Happiness”.  Read the paragraph.  Notice it is not the guarantee but the pursuit.

Americans traditionally have not asked the government to do things for them that they can do themselves.  Originally we didn’t even ask the government to step in when we had personal issues, we expected neighbors to step up.  The churches and synagogues were the centers of help and charity.  Ultimately people were expected to be their own first responders in life.

We seem to have lost that concept.  We need to get it back.  Being our brothers keeper does not mean relieving him responsibility.

(Php 2:3-4 NAS77) Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.

The hard part of this to understand is that often what is best for the other person is not what they want and by giving them what they want we actually do them long-term damage.  This calls for real genuine love for them, guided by discernment and wisdom.

This morning I was humming an old patriot song from my childish memory,

What can I do for my country,
For all the things she’s done for me?

That brings to mind the old quote from JFK,

“Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.”

Those were the days when you could call Democrats real Americans.  I miss those kind of Democrats.

Step up.  Grow up.  Reverse the order if you need to.  Accept responsibility for your own life and look around to see if there is anyone you can really help.

homo unius libri

Opus 2023-183: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Banana Justice

As I read through the Declaration of Independence I came across this complaint,

“For depriving us, in many Cases, of the Benefits of Trial by Jury:”

There are a number of ways you can deprive someone of the “benefit”.  The most recent example is the accusations of the patriots who made the mistake of trusting the policemen who invited them into the capital.  I have not followed the events called trials but I can imagine how the jury would be selected, evidence manipulated and law interpreted by a judge that was interested in political show trials more than law and justice.  It was blatant in the Congressional hearings.  I assume that the courts had no more evidence so it must have continued.

Did they get a fair trial?

Or take the police that took down George Floyd and kept him from rampaging through the city.  With all of the media circus, threats toward the jury by the mobs, refusal for change of venue and other clown acts, do you really feel the trials had anything to do with justice?

Donald Trump has been harassed by everyone with a law degree and a government paycheck.  He is being dragged through the courts while the same judicial system ignores the blatant crimes by their Democrat handlers.  Does this have anything to do with any kind of justice except banana justice?

You know the kinds of things I am talking about.

Maybe it is time to read the first paragraphs again.

homo unius libri

Opus 2022-162: Cornerstone Considerations: NWO, 1787: A Culture of Acceptance

Sunday we were remembering Memorial Day and that brought out what could be called patriotic songs.  As we sang I was reminded that these are not just patriotic, they are hymns that lift up the Christian foundations of our country.  That is juxtaposed to the values of our current junta and cultural elites.  One thought jumped out at me in America the Beautiful.

“And crown they good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!”

It was considered so important that it appeared in the first and last verses and the punctuation is as printed.

One of the Christian concepts that undergirded our country was brotherhood.  We have always been a country founded on an idea, not a race or ethnic group.  We are individuals that are united by acceptance of that great concept of “all men are created equal”.  Not equal outcomes.  That is rubbish and ridiculous.  It called for equal opportunity.  It was an ideal we would strive for, not a standard we had achieved.

You see this idea everywhere you look.  When we say the Pledge of Allegiance we recite the words, “One nation under God”.  No, I did not forget the comma.  If you look at our money you see “E Pluribus Unum” which means “out of many, one”.  We have taken people from all cultures and accepted them as a part of us if they are willing to be accepted.

This came out in an unexpected way in what is called the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.  For those who never took US History from me in 8th grade let me remind you that this involved the area that we call the Midwest today and how that area would be adopted by the new country.  Notice that this is four years after the formal end of the American Revolution and two years before the Constitution will be ratified.  Take a look at a few lines from Section 14, Article 5,

“And, whenever any of the said States shall have sixty thousand free inhabitants therein, such State shall be admitted, by its delegates, into the Congress of the United States, on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever, and shall be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and State government:...”

Notice the words, “on an equal footing”.  Even in the politics of the era there was an understanding that new states needed full acceptance, the same as people.  

We need to be reminded of the idea that was America and understand that the current Social Justice Warriors and their commissars want to destroy that idea with group politics expressed through things like Affirmative Action and Critical Race Theory.  They want the law to apply to you based on some non-American measure such as race or gender instead of treating you like an individual under God.

Be aware that we need “brotherhood from sea to shining sea”.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-268: Cornerstone Considerations: CUSA, Impeachment Limits and Potential

I keep hearing Republicans shooting off their mouths calling for impeachment of Joe Biden.  Since we are approaching Constitution Day it might be a good time to review impeachment.  First let’s review what the Constitution says.  

Article I deals with the powers and responsibilities of the Senate and House of Representatives.  In there you find Section II which states,

“The House of Representatives shall choose the Speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment.”

Impeachment starts in the House.  Senators and state officials can talk all they want but unless you can get the House to start the ball rolling, you are wasting your breath.  Since the Democrats are in charge of that body we could stop right here, but we will keep going.

Section III moves to the other legislative body.

“The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.  When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation.  When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present.”

If you know anything about the make-up of the Senate you know that this is strike two and three for impeaching Joe Biden.

Article II is concerned with the Executive.  Section 4 says,

“The president, vice-president and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Although this sounds like it is limiting removal to a few causes, in reality this opens the door quite wide.  You can impeach for “other high crimes and misdemeanors.”  We tend to think of misdemeanors as minor crimes.  In reality most presidents have probably done something they could be impeached for if there was the political will.  I think it goes without say that the Republicans don’t have that will.  I will say it anyway, the Republicans don’t have that kind of will.

There is another aspect here that is overlooked.  “All civil officers of the United States” can be impeached.  Here is where the lack of will really shows up.  This phrase only excludes the military.  Any other employee of the Federal Government can be removed by impeachment.  We could transform the country, assuming the Democrats lose the House and Senate in 2022, by going after judges who betray their oath to the Constitution.  We could also go after all the employees of the alphabet agencies who think they have the right to dismantle the country and make us a socialist state.

That would be a great way to celebrate Constitution Day in 2023.  If we can’t terminate because of Civil Service protection we can put them in jail for treason.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-216: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Standing SWATS

We are so used to the United States military being a major factor in world peace that we forget it is a recent phenomenon.  Before World War II the tradition of our country was to keep a small cadre of active duty soldiers and use them to train an army if the need ever arose.  Every adult male was considered a part of the militia.  Knowing how to shoot a rifle was common.  After 1945 we never got back to normal.

I don’t think that is what we have to fear today.  Note the sentence in the Declaration:

     “He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our

            Legislatures.”

Today almost every federal agency has an armed response team, a SWAT team.  They are heavily armed, hightly trained and have armored vehicles.  Now I ask you, “Why would the Department of Education have a SWAT team?”  Good question, do they?  Read the article at the Heritage Foundation if you doubt it.

What is the purpose of such teams?  If a law is broken you have warrants and due process.  That is not good enough for the tyrants in government trying to help you do the things that are good for you.  What says “I care” like a squad of armored goons breaking down you front door in the middle of the night just because someone told them to.  What says “Know your place or get squashed” better than the Health Department Gestapo coming for you based on information provided by Facebook?

Yes, our overlords once again have standing armies.  They are filled with people who have no regard for the Bill of Rights or you as a citizen.  If we are ever forced to Nurnberg trials again they will be the one in the box.

The only thing that keeps history from repeating itself in a destructive way is alert citizens.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-214: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Dissolving Manly Firmness

The Declaration of Independence is written as if the King of England was the whole problem but the Founders were aware that they were being ruled by a Constitutional Monarchy.  That meant that the king had many limitations put on him by Parliament.  In fact, the members of the Continental Congress considered themselves loyal to the king and tried to go around Parliament to get his support.  A year before the Declaration of Independence they sent the Olive Branch Petition stating their loyalty and asking for him to step in for them.  They were rejected because they were considered inferior colonists who needed the guidance of a king and Parliament.  

I say this because I want keep that in mind with this part of the Declaration:

“He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly Firmness his Invasions on the Rights of the People.”

Consider that the tyrant seeking to humble the American people is not one man.  Ask yourself is the destruction going on just the work of one political party.  What we have is a few people standing up and trying to make a difference “with manly Firmness” and we see many different methods being used to “dissolve” them.  Think of the people incarcerate for the events of January 6 for nothing more than trespass.  Think of one woman shot for no reason by a cop that has yet to be identified or prosecuted.  Think of a duly elected congresswoman who is kicked off of all committees.  Think of other elected officials having sudden accusations against them.  Remember how congress wanted to pass a bill making it impossible for Donald Trump to run again for any office.

I think we see a government committed to the destruction of the Rights of the People.

Keep in mind that you might be the next one to emerge on the Deep State radar.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-204: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Imperial Plunder

The Declaration of Independence talks about the “causes which impel them to the Separation.”  Some of the list will rings your bells.  Others will have you scratching your head.  For instance we have the claim,

“He has plundered our Seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the Lives of our People.”

I guess if you consider the refusal to allow Americans to drill for oil of the coast you might have an issue.

Let’s spend some time looking at the Complaints of 1776 and see how some of them relate to 2021.  I don’t know at this point if I will go in order or just whatever jumps out on a given day.  I can almost guarantee I will not deal with all of them.  If you have not read the entire Declaration of Independence yet, you still have about three weeks.

The first three problems mentioned deal with laws and how the rule of law is being undermined by the king and parliament.  First we see,

“He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good.”

We see this thought expressed several ways but they all deal with how the governing authority is manipulating the legislative process to make it impossible for the voices of the colonies to be heard.  They are ignored or coerced instead of being listened to.  We will see as we work through the D of I that when laws are passed they work against the benefit of the citizens.

We see that kind of thing going on again today.  Time and time again it is shown that the people of the United States feel one way and the laws passed, the executive order issued or the regulation issued by a faceless civil servant, are just the opposite.  Think in terms of the invasion across our southern border, the throttling of gas and oil production, green energy, Critical Race Theory, brainwashing the military, support for Israel, attempts at registering firearms and the list goes on.  It is clear that almost everything coming out of Washington is designed to remove our liberties and increase the power of the Government.

The similarities are ominous when you realize that much of this is done by fiat, executive orders, rather than by the legislative process.  Hail Caesar!  Remember he knows what is best for you.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-201: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Flexing the Bands

The first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence (DI) talks about the “Political Bands which have connected them with another”.  What “Bands” were they talking about?  It was more than just political.  

They were bound by the common sense of being Englishmen and having the rights of Englishmen.  People who did not pay attention in history class are not aware that the Bill of Rights in the Constitution are a reworking of the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.  Being an Englishman was not just a matter of speaking English.  It was a body of beliefs that incorporated the principle that certain freedoms were in the category of God given rights, not political payoffs.  They were being denied that which was understood to apply to all Englishmen.  

They were bound by religion.  They did not agree on everything by any means.  They had serious differences in theology.  They had disagreements on how the church should be governed.  They had different worship styles.  In those differences the English had been slowly working toward the idea that you could go to different churches and worship the same God.  This bond never totally went away until the 20th century when Great Britain and the Church of England began to drift into heresy.  At the time of the DI the Anglican church was the official state church is several of the colonies.

They were bound by blood.  Many of them still had family living in the British Isles and the dominant culture could trace its genealogy back.  

These are strong bonds.  We have had similar bands holding us together as a country.  The question we need to be facing is, “Are they enough?”  Even more to the point, “Do they still exist?”  I think a majority of Americans still think they have the rights spelled out in the first ten Amendments to the Constitution.  Unfortunately the ruling class disagrees with that.  The bonds of religion are being dissolved from both the inside and the outside.  On the inside we have the churches being suborned by people calling themselves Christians while denying everything the Bible teaches.  On the outside we have direct attacks on the church and its ability to follow its calling.  As for the bonds of family, our Proregressive* leaders are working overtime to destroy the American family.

So it is time to think about our bands.  I would hope that we can renew them and pull together once again.  If we can’t then it may be time to consider other options.

*(Liberals, educators, the media, socialists, communists, crony capitalists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, BLM, MSM, Deep State, etc.  Another word for swamp dwellers)

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-096: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Age of Consent

The Declaration of Independence declares that the government is based on “the Consent of the Governed,...”  There is a sense in which this is true in any government.  Generally speaking no government of any type can continue to exist unless there are enough people who support it.  This is true in dictatorships as well as republics.  People forget that Hitler was elected and had the support of most Germans.  I will admit that they were manipulated and deceived to some point but just as we are being deceived, much of the acceptance was based on a willingness to be deceived.  The Soviet Union fell apart when it could not keep enough people content.

We have a higher expectation in the West.  We have the highest in the United States.  We think our elected representatives are supposed to listen to us.  Our first Amendment guarantees us the right to petition for redress of grievances.  The American colonies had the same expectation and it was not being realized.  The government in England was ignoring them.  They might kindly pat them on the head but they were still ignored.

A growing number of Americans are believing that the government has no concern with listening to what we have to say.  I will concede that there are many who are happy as clams and want things the way they are.  The same was true in Colonial America.  I am of the impression that the colonial population was divided up in thirds with Royalists, Rebels and Leave-me-aloners making up the fractions.  I have no idea what the division is today.

One thing I do know is that most of the actions of the Progressives* are not supported by the majority of Americans.  The kind of actions I mean are courts declaring that biological males can compete in sports with biological females because they declare they identify as women.  I mean passing laws allowing children to be sexually abused.  I mean the move to defund the police.  I mean letting violent criminals out of jail with no bail.  You know the kind of things we see every day.

It has been going on for years and is being pushed by both parties.  It does not have my consent.

*(Liberals, educators, socialists, communists, crony capitalists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, etc.  Another word for swamp dwellers)

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-061: Cornerstone Considerations: CUSA, III, Can We Talk?, Part 2 of 2

Again we consider the definition of treason from the Constitution,

“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

The definition does not stop at talk about actual war.  It goes on to include “adhering” and helping America’s enemies.

Who are America’s enemies?  Is it anyone I disagree with?  Obviously not, or at least it is obvious to me.  I am not sure it is obvious to the Progressive voices of censorship and reeducation camps.  Years ago when I was drafted to serve in Vietnam I was required to take an oath.  In that oath were the words, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;...”  I didn’t think much about it at the time but now I am more concerned about our domestic enemies than the foreign.

What is a domestic enemy?  Domestic is obviously juxtapositioned to foreign.  It refers to the home grown type of person who wants to destroy the country.  Obama would not qualify as a traitor for wanting to fundamentally transform the United States.  After all, he was elected and was clear about what he wanted to do.  The part where he might be considered a domestic enemy was his rule by fiat, commonly called executive order.  He openly admitted he was going around the power invested in the legislature.  That was crossing a line.  I don’t think that was the method of transforming the country people were open to.  It is the same type of thing we see going on in Washington today.  

At one point in time the Communist Party was outlawed in the Untied States.  I don’t know its current status.  The reason it was outlawed was not because it was Communist but because it was advocating the violent overthrow of the legal government of the United States.  

I am sure that the Progressives in control of the media, education and intelligence agencies will be labeling everyone who believes in the Constitution as treasonous.  They want to make the violent preservation of the legal government treason.  I think they already are labeling anyone they disagree with this way.

History is written by the victors.  We are in a battle for the soul of our nation.  Who will write the history books of our grandchildren?

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-060: Cornerstone Considerations: CUSA, III, Can We Talk?, Part 1 of 2

The question in the title is double sided.  One side is are we willing to sit down and speak about this issue.  The other part, which is part of the question, involves whether we will be allowed to have the discussion much longer.  Both the censors of the media and the coming police state will tell us, “No.”

We as a nation really need to have a serious discussion about treason.  We need to define it and apply the charge where necessary.  I wonder if we are capable to have such a discussion.  I wonder if we will be allowed to have such a discussion.

First, we need to look at what the Constitution says about treason.  We find that it is defined by the Founders.

Article III, Sect. 3.

    1.  Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.  No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

You would think that would be clear but it isn’t to some people.  We need to spend a few moments looking at the words and their meanings.

Notice the phrase “levying war against them”.  Who is the “them” being talked about?  Back up a little and you find that it is referring to the states that make up our union.  Can you make war against a few states at a time?  

What does it mean to “levy war”?  We talk about the Cold War that existed between the Soviet Union and the United States.  It was not a shooting war but shooting went on.  It was primarily waged by clandestine actions.  Some were physical.  Most were in the form of propaganda, spying, sabotage, under cover political action and anything else that could weaken the country.  Do any of these types of actions fit any groups or individuals in our country?  And as far as physical violence, what do you call the riots of the past year, the coercion used by the DOJ against anyone who speaks their mind and recently mobilization of the National Guard in response to what was little more than trespass.  In the face of no real physical insurrection the reports are that the Guard has been authorized to use deadly force.  Against Americans?  That seems strangely close to levying war.

To be continued...

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-047: Cornerstone Considerations: BRX, Enemies, Real and Imagined

In one headline we see the socialist influence on our political party.  The link is from Citizen Free Press to something called Mises Institute.  The headline reads, “Trump's Potential Legacy: 50 Million+ Enemies of the State.”  What jumped out of me was the phrase “enemies of the state”.  It wasn’t “traitors” or enemies of the United States, but “enemies of the state.”
 

This is socialist thinking.  It presupposes that the highest power is the State.  In every Marxist society all must bow before the needs of the State.  There is no personal desire or need that comes before the good of the whole.  Power from the top sets the standards and demands obedience.

These people are enemies of the Constitution, enemies of liberty, in a word, Progressives*.  

The Constitution is a document that spells out the powers of the government and the whole viewpoint is summed up in the 10th Amendment,

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So when congress passes a law that reduces your freedom, it is unconstitutional and makes them an enemy of the Constitution.  When a judge allows his own personal opinion to trump the Constitution, he becomes its enemy.  When a president writes an executive order that goes beyond instructing his staff how to fulfill their duty but instead puts you in a box, he becomes and enemy of the Constitution.

When you read the Bill of Rights, don’t stop after the first one.

*(Liberals, educators, socialists, communists, crony capitalists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, etc.  Another word for swamp dwellers)

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-045: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Power Sources

Here is a relatively long paragraph from the beginning of the Declaration of Independence.  If you have it memorized then it is just for reference, if not, it might be inspiring to read it again.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, 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-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.  Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.  But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.  Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.  The History of the present King of Great-Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.  To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World.

The first sentence, dealing with “all men created equal” and “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”, has been discussed in many forums at many times.  I am sure I will chime in on that repeatedly myself but today I want to focus on the two mentions made about the sources of what we hold dear.

First we have the source of our rights.  Notice that this is the “Creator”.  When I was teaching this to my middle school students I kept running into the impossible-to-believe ignorance they lived in.  They did not have a clue to what “Creator” meant, let alone “endowed” or “unalienable”.  What was even worse, they did not know they needed to understand them or how to look up the meanings if they felt a need.  

The source of our rights is God Himself.  I would have my students read this and then ask them where our rights came from.  The almost universal answer was, “The government”.  After I got through screaming we took another look at it.  The basic belief of the Founders whether they were Christians, Deist, Jewish or garden variety pagan was that certain rights are given to us by whatever the overwhelming source of power is.  That could be Jesus or the sacred oaks of the Druids but it certainly wasn’t the government.

There is a second source referred to in this paragraph.  It is found in the phrase,

“deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...”

This is why the Constitution will, in a few years, start with the words, “We the Elite of the United States”.  I know this is heresy to our political betters, the Progressives*, but they are supposed to be listening to us.  Power is supposed to flow up from the people, not down from the elite.  

Power is meant to flow.  It flows from God to the people and only then to the government.  The people taking over America are trying to isolate the church and silence the people.  They are doing it with lock downs, fear and censorship.  Our hope is in us as individuals getting the order right and demanding that government become responsive to us again.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-034: Cornerstone Considerations: CUSA, I, 9, Bill of Attainder

I hesitate to bring it up but there is a little phrase in the Constitution that needs to be either followed or removed.

It is “bill of attainder”.  It is found in Article I, Section 9 and reads,

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed

The purpose of the bill is to keep despotic legislators from writing laws targeting specific individuals and applying the penalty without a fair trial.

This comes up in two areas that our Progressive* leaders seem to be charging into.  First, they want to pass a law saying that Trump can never run for president again.  While they are at it why don’t they just revise their wording to say that no Republican can run again unless he gets the approval of the DNC.  The second is to say he can never enter the capitol again.  What if he is elected to the house or senate?  The Founders were not stupid or ignorant.  They knew what they were doing.

Welcome to the Socialist States of America.

*(Liberals, educators, socialists, communists, crony capitalists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, etc.  Another word for swamp dwellers)

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-032: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Define “Necessary”

How about something scary to read before you go to bed,

“When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another,...”

There are several concepts we need to look at.  First, and scariest, is the phrase, “dissolve the Political Bands”.  I like the word “dissolve”.  It has a gradual, gentle sound to it.  Unfortunately it did not work out that way in 1775 when we had the “shot heard ‘round the world.”  On November 3 we had the “steal muffled round the country” instead.  Will it be necessary to get into dissolving again?  I don’t know.  I am sure I don’t want to live in a Socialist States of America.

Is it really “necessary”.  That is the word that Thomas Jefferson chose.  Maybe that is why the Progressive* goons are removing Jefferson along with all the other Founders.  Jefferson will go on to make a case for the dissolving.  The hard part is knowing when you come to the place where nothing can be done.  This brings to mind a quote from Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

“You only have power over people as long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything, he's no longer in your power—he's free again.”

I had the hardest time getting verification of where he wrote this but eventually I found a site that claimed it came from The Gulag Archipelago.  

The American Revolution was not started by the landed gentry of Virginia but by the rabble rousers of Massachusetts.  Neither will raise a whimper today.  So far we have a bit of wiggle room.  We still have the hope that our states will step up to the plate and resist the power grab.  My hope and prayer is that the Communists in Congress will overreach and fall flat on their faces before the dissolving becomes necessary.

*(Liberals, educators, socialists, communists, crony capitalists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, etc.  Another word for swamp dwellers)

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-026: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, History Is Happening

A document that often gets ignored in our discussions of the foundations of the country is the Declaration of Independence.  It is not the Constitution.  The Constitution is our core legal document.  At the same time it is part of the thinking and philosophy that makes us what we are.  It shows us what was going on in the minds of the Founders.  It needs to be considered.

When I was teaching American history I tried to get the middle school students to paraphrase parts of the Declaration of Independence.  I told them to pretend they were trying to put it in words that their five year old brother would understand.  These eighth graders could not do it.  I tried for years and rarely could get across the idea of restating in simpler words.

Take for instance the first phrase,

When in the Course of human Events,...

A typical “paraphrase” of a modern eight grader would be, “When human Events Course”.  After I quit screaming and they removed my straight jacket I would go back and try again.

What does it mean?  How do you put it simply?  How about, “As life goes on” or “All during history”.  Is that too hard?  Evidently.

The Founders were immersed in history.  They read and studied.  They argued and discussed.  Were all of their facts correct?  I doubt it.  Did all of their arguments make sense?  Don’t make me laugh.  Were they always consistent?  No, they were always human.  That having been said, they called each other to account and tried to see what had worked and what had not worked.

We are involved in human events.  Life is going on.  We need to pay attention and put in our two cents worth.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-018: Cornerstone Considerations: A Suggested Journey

Our nation is in turmoil.  I for one wonder which way to turn.  In reality, much of what is going on will not touch me in the immediate future but I am concerned about the inimmediate future.  I don’t expect the black helicopters to hover over my house.  I don’t expect the SWAT teams to be lining up in my driveway.  I don’t expect it this week.  Next week, who knows.

My concern is for the future.  I have children.  I now have grandchildren.  I have friends who have the same and I am concerned about their futures as much as mine, more actually.  One of the things I have found helps is to go to the original documents.  As a Christian, that means looking at the Bible.  As an American it means looking at the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  I am looking at the Bible on a daily basis but it has been awhile since I have carefully and thoughtfully pondered our founding documents.

I read through the Declaration of Independence before I started to write.  I printed it out so I can mark it up as I go.  I has been eight years since I made this journey.  Shame on me.

Let’s see where it leads.

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-171: Cornerstone Considerations: D of I, Who Is “He”?

I am practicing what I preach.  I am reading the Declaration of Independence.  It is hard to get past the first two paragraphs without joining a militia, but I made it.  As I continue to read I come across things I have written on before,

“He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance.”

As I kept reading I kept seeing things that the Founding Fathers acknowledged.  They seem to keep happening.  With the recent riots I noticed this passage.

“He has excited domestic Insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the Inhabitants of our Frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known Rule of Warfare, is an undistinguished Destruction, of all Ages, Sexes and Conditions.”

We have certainly been experiencing this as a nation.  It has not touched my neighborhood but, if it is not reined in, may be here soon.  The insurrection is not random or spontaneous.  It is organized and encouraged. 

As I read through the different issues I kept coming across the word “he”.  In the Declaration it is clear that they are referring to King George III of England and the people he appointed.  We are in theory a republic.  We are not supposed to have kings any more, yet, we see the same things happening and seem powerless to stop them.  Who has assumed the Imperial We in our culture?

Who is “he”?  Who is this person or group that is doing everything it can to destroy us as a free people?  I have a few suggestions.

The first “he” is a congressionally and constitutionally authorized establishment which has gotten way out of hand.  I refer to the courts and the activist judges who are trying to turn the United Stated into a People’s Republic.  The Founders feared a court coup, and they had good reason.

Another “he” is the media.  As clever criminals will do, they know the rules we use and find ways to abuse and destroy them.  They know about the first amendment.  For themselves they fight for it with all they have.  For those who disagree with them, not so much.  In fact they put more effort into destroying our rights than they do defending their own.  You see, no one is trying to take away theirs, so they can spend their energy on stifling us.

“He” would currently refer to Governors and Mayors who have used the current race baiting to advance their own secret dreams of sadistic power.  They get a rush from crushing the helpless.

Will we overcome this?  I hope so.  I fled the People’s Republik of Kalifornia to the Free State of Texas only to find that the governor here seems to have drunk the kool-aide too.  I guess you can’t run and, long term, you can’t hide.

Time to stand.

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-131: Cornerstone Considerations: CUSA, Insurrection

Seven years ago I wrote and referred to the responsibility of the Federal government to the states.  Seven years.  How time flies.

Article IV, Section 4

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.

There is another place that refers specifically to the role of the legislature.  I bring this up in regard to what we see happening in Minneapolis and in copy-cat fashion around the country,

Article I, Section 8

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.;

Notice it says to “suppress insurrections”.  What is happening in Minneapolis is not a protest.  It is insurrection.  It is blatant and organized opposition to the lawful government of the city.  You can pretty it up and dress it in a clown suit all you want but it is still rioting.  What happened when the armed citizens went to express their disagreement about how the governor was shutting down the state was a protest.  It was peaceful and clear in its purpose.  It was not their to start a revolution.  What is happening now is rioting and insurrection. 

As I read the Constitution it is the legislature that is supposed to be responding.  I am sure there is some reason why the baton has been passed to the president.  Either way, it is the responsibility of the United States government to suppress this civil unrest that neither the city nor the state seems to want to deal with.

Deal with it.

homo unius libri