THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE AND UN-AMERICAN PRINCIPLE OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

Posted on July 16, 2012 by Richard Johnson

Think what you will about Wikipedia, it is a very handy tool when facing these false principles. The Wikipedia definition:

Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term which denotes language, ideas, policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social and institutional offense in occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, religious belief, disability, and age-related contexts.

Isn’t that precious? Notice the conjunctive, “seen as.” There is no perceived need to explain who made these determinations, what their qualifications are or who appointed them to this role. Moreover, have any of the determinations been adjudicated?

Shouldn’t policies actually seek to carry out the law instead of seeking to minimize social and institutional offense? Are those who impose Political Correctness the same crowd that destroyed etiquette, manners and chivalry?

Isn’t Political Correctness imposed by those whose intent is to silence opposition while largely ignoring PC themselves? In fact, of all false American principles, Political Correctness may be the most insidious. Because of the widespread PC enforcement over the past 40 years, we have lost much of our vocabulary. We have surrendered much of our ability to call sin, lies, fornication, theft, covetousness and fraud by their name.

It seems clear we have allowed political correctness to tie our hands and our tongues when, for example, facing the real and present threat from Islam.

Here is a partial list of fraud related terms: insincere,  artificial, backhanded, counterfeit, double-dealing, double-faced, fake, feigned, hypocritical, Janus-faced, jive [slang], left-handed, lip, mealy, mealy-mouthed, Pecksniffian, phony, phony-baloney, pretended, two-faced, unctuous affected, assumed, claptrap, contrived, forced, mechanical, put-on, simulated, strained, unnatural; empty, hollow, meaningless; deceitful, devious, dishonest, false, untruthful; facile, glib, superficial; bogus, sham; campy, facetious, jocular, tongue-in-cheek; canting, pharisaical, pious, sanctimonious, self-righteous and simon-pure.

Other words proscribed by this deceitful crowd: lie, fable, fabrication, fairy tale, falsehood, falsity, fib, mendacity, prevarication, story, tale, taradiddle (or tarradiddle), untruth, whopper, distortion, exaggeration, half-truth; ambiguity, equivocation, obliquity; defamation, libel, slander; perjury; bluff, fiction, pose, pretense (or pretence); humbug, jive, nonsense; canard, fallacy, misconception, myth; falsification, misinformation, misreport, misrepresentation, misstatement; deceit, deceitfulness, dishonesty, duplicity and fraudulent.

You get the picture. (Fraud, fake, phony, devious, deceit, duplicity, sanctimonious, and self-righteous are among the words I have reclaimed.) You will be exhilarated as you begin to restore power and persuasion to your speaking and writing—what’s more you’ll be effective. As we patriots restore America, let us reclaim our vocabulary —let us reclaim manners, etiquette and, yes, chivalry as well— as we banish PC to the ash-heap of history.

To that end, take a few minutes to see political correctness being spread. Read these instructions on How To Be Politically Correct. Then use each of these words in a sentence, pertinent to current affairs. You are on your way towards freedom from these insufferable un-American language police.

Posted in Engaging the culture, Liberals Deatroying America, Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE AND UN-AMERICAN PRINCIPLE OF OPENNESS

Posted on July 15, 2012 by Richard Johnson

How could there be anything wrong with openness? Isn’t Openness a key promise Barak Obama made then ignored—failing to deliver? No. Openness was the central principle used in making the PPACA (Obamacare) law.

Here is how Wikipedia explains openness:

Openness is a very general philosophical position from which some individuals and organizations operate, often highlighted by a decision-making process recognizing communal management by distributed stakeholders (users/producers/contributors) rather than a centralized authority (owners, experts, boards of directors, etc.) [emphasis mine]

This is clearly contrary to the Declaration of Independence. I believe Openness is a principle. But it is not an American Principle. It is rather, an Anti-American—Marxist—principle.

Senator Obama was being mostly truthful when he promised openness. Most thought he meant “We the People” would see the major decisions being made. Like other Obama achievements, all 2800 pages of Obamacare was “communally” put together by the “stakeholders” —the identity groups of the Left, the building blocks of the Democrat Party. That’s how Speaker Pelosi could credibly say, “We have to pass it to find out what’s in it.” They were fundamentally transforming America with “Openness.”

Oh, remember Mayor Bloomberg’s declaration quoted yesterday?” “Everything the United States stands for and New York stands for is tolerance and openness.” We saw that tolerance is a device. Make no mistake, Openness is an Anti-American principle.

We must defeat this attack on America from within. We must successfully defeat and replace these progressives at all levels of government this November. Then in the longer run, we must defeat this thinking in our institutions of learning.

Posted in 2012, Lawless Government, Liberals Deatroying America, Liberty List 2012, Obama | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE AND UN-AMERICAN PRINCIPLE OF TOLERANCE

Posted on July 14, 2012 by Richard Johnson

Tolerance has been taught in American schools for at least 30 years. Let’s review the meaning of “tolerance.” Merriam Webster says tolerance is:

1.    : capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina

2.    a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one’s own

  b : the act of allowing something : toleration

3.    : the allowable deviation from a standard; especially : the range of variation permitted in maintaining a specified dimension in machining a piece

4.   a (1) : the capacity of the body to endure or become less responsive to a substance (as a drug) or a physiological insult especially with repeated use or exposure <developed a tolerance to painkillers>; also : the immunological state marked by unresponsiveness to a specific antigen (2) : relative capacity of an organism to grow or thrive when subjected to an unfavorable environmental factor

b : the maximum amount of a pesticide residue that may lawfully remain on or in food

So, they must be teaching the second definition.  They teach that to indulge beliefs and practices conflicting with our own is an American principle. Could that mean if a stranger moves next door and turns out to be, in principle, a rapist, you tolerate him?  Certainly, if tolerance is a principle—an American principle—there are things excused or exempted from the principle of tolerance. Who decides? Turns out it is the same Progressives that push it at us in the first place. Let’s follow a little example.

We Americans are supposed to tolerate a triumphal monument to our attackers. Mayor Bloomberg invoked the “American principle of tolerance” in his insistence on promoting a triumphal mosque at Ground Zero in New York City. “Sarah Palin has a right to her opinions, but I could not disagree more. Everything the United States stands for and New York stands for is tolerance and openness.”

Not building a triumphal mosque at that sacred place would somehow “violate American principles of tolerance and openness.” Got it? Mayor Bloomberg is determined to operate on the principle of tolerance (“Everything America and New York stands for”). Let me see that again. “Everything America and New York stands for.” Does the mayor demonstrate his commitment to a principal, tolerance, that is “everything America and New York stands for?” Well, he has certainly demonstrated his unwavering commitment to the tolerance of:

  • Islam and forms of Shariah law.
  • Homosexuality.
  • Abortion.

Is the mayor tolerant of smoking tobacco? No. He has banned tobacco even in Central Park and on private land.

Does he tolerate trans-fats?” No, No. Trans-fats are banned. What about salt? Restaurants are banned from having salt on tables. Presumably, salt in cooking is tolerated. The Mayor is tolerant of mass-merchandiser Target but Wal-Mart? Banned.

Speaking before the United Nations, the Mayor declared, “There are powers only governments can exercise, policies only governments can mandate and enforce and results only governments can achieve. To halt the worldwide epidemic of non-communicable diseases, governments at all levels must make healthy solutions the default social option. That is ultimately government’s highest duty.”

Mayor Bloomberg is not an exception, he is exemplary. Every one of this crowd that stands on the “principle” of tolerance, seeks power to ban what you want and to force you to accept what you don’t want. President Obama just grabs dictatorial power.

My mother was clear on the subject. She loved me unconditionally but she did not tolerate bad behavior. She taught there are times when each of us must tolerate something, but she knew tolerance is not an American Principle!

(We did not ignore Mayor Bloomberg’s principle of “Openness,” It is next, tomorrow.)

Posted in 2012, Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE AND UN-AMERICAN PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS AND EQUITY

Posted on July 13, 2012 by Richard Johnson

(EQUALITY OF OUTCOME) Here is a false principle right out of the Karl Marx “materialism” playbook and readymade for “spreading the wealth around.

According to Wikipedia, equality (and fairness) may refer to social concepts. Among these are:

  • Egalitarianism
  • Equality of outcome
  • Gender Equality
  • Racial equality (of outcome)
  • Social equality
  • Distributive Justice

Make no mistake, “sexual orientation equality” is at the core in “social equality.” You are right. None of these is based on Biblical, Constitutional or Declaration of Independence principles. Indeed, they are advanced with the objective of replacing all of that. They can be summarized fairly and completely with the Obama slogan, “Fundamentally Transform America.” These are advanced by people whose purpose is to take (steal) your money and choke your Liberty. If you object, you are called a racist. But they are not just committed to taking your money and choking your Liberty. Fairness is at the very core of all the materialistic threads of Marxism. The Progressives are determined to replace our free enterprise system with a command system based on the false values expressed in those bullets at Wikipedia (above). We have more than a century where Marxism has been tried and failed every time it was tried. The truth is, “fairness” is fundamentally immoral.

I often use the phrase “We the People” followed by the tag line, “We don’t believe in shared sacrifice, we believe in shared opportunity.” This is the true moral basis for our free enterprise system. We are free to create, free to work, and free to take risk.

Taking action against multiculturalism is as easy as spreading the truth about our American culture with any American coin in your purse or pocket. But, what about fairness and equity? How can you individually make the case—the moral case—for free enterprise? Our friend, Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute, has just what you need. Watch this AEI video which lays out the moral basis for free enterprise and gives you a chance to create your own case and enter it into a current AEI competition. Watch, “Don’t Eat Your Dog: The Surprising Moral Case For Free Enterprise.” Be inspired—

—then go to work.

Posted in 2012, Liberals Deatroying America, Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE AND UN-AMERICAN PRINCIPLE OF DIVERSITY

Posted on July 12, 2012 by Richard Johnson

By definition, diversity is: the state of having people who are different races or who have different cultures in a group or organization. For example

  • The city is known for its cultural/ethnic diversity.
  • The school aims for diversity in its student population.
  • There is a greater diversity in the city’s population now.

Diversity actually occurs factually. It is not a virtue and is obviously not an American principle. As used by “Cultural Police,” it is in tension with Multiculturalism. Each culture is supposed to be special and preserved. On the other hand, your group must be diverse. But every institution, controlled by Progressives, proceeds without a blink of an eye.

Witness my local University of Minnesota. As starters, diversity is partnered with “equity” at the Office for Equity and Diversity:

We all share responsibility for equity and diversity—it’s everybody’s everyday work. Diversity goes well beyond numeric representation and access. Far from just enriching campus life or the academic experience, equity and diversity are critical to issues of campus culture and climate, and fundamental to everything we do at the University of Minnesota.

Multiculturalism has been folded right in under the Office for Equity and Diversity with the Multicultural Center for Academic Excellence.

The Multicultural Center for Academic Excellence (MCAE) is a campus-wide resource that promotes an inclusive atmosphere to foster and enrich multicultural understanding among all members of the University of Minnesota community. MCAE’s commitment to creating such a climate is driven by a student-first culture in which students are the highest priority.

MCAE seeks to provide services and programs that create powerful, caring human connections. The MCAE staff provides culturally-sensitive advice, and coordinates programs for individuals and groups on academic, financial, personal, and career concerns.

Success for MCAE is defined by the ongoing development of a culture of achievement that values equity, excellence, and human diversity while promoting social justice.

Oh, the diversity office covers multiculturalism while it is also the office of Equity and now a fourth—Social Justice! Wow, an office with four of these anti-American “principles!” It seems there is no need for Christianity at the U of M. And diversity could, of course, never stretch to that radical extreme. One wonders how the madras trained Islamist blends in with the GLBT activist at the U of M.

It was hard to get the Republican controlled Minnesota legislature to help support a new football stadium but they happily vote for funding this garbage bi-annually. This must change in Minnesota and all across America.

We’ll put our discussion of Social Justice off until Tuesday but we’ll cover Equity tomorrow.

Posted in 2012, Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America, Remaking the Republicans | Leave a comment

MUST A SECRET SWISS BANK ACCOUNT BE A BAD THING, (DNC) CHIRWOMAN WASSERMAN-SHULTZ?

Posted on July 11, 2012 by Richard Johnson

Or Could a Secret Swiss Bank Account Be a Good Thing?

It seems the week-end coordinated Democrat attack on Governor Romney, over Bermuda investments and Swiss bank accounts, was to be led by Congresswoman and DNC Chair, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz. She went right after him attacking—accusing him of possibly having unknown business interests and Swill bank accounts. She demanded an investigation into this Romney secretive style—not open and transparent like President Obama and members of his administration. But she ran into trouble here:

And now the plot thickens.

The Weekly Standard reveals that Wasserman-Schultz had investments in… you guessed it… Swiss banks, through a 401(k) retirement fund. She also had money in a fund that invested in various foreign companies, including “HSBC bank (a British financial institution), Hengdeli Holdings (a Hong Kong watch company), Novo Nordisk (a Danish drug company), Volkswagen (a German auto company), Rakuten (a Japanese shipping business), Richemont Cie Financiere (a Swiss luxury goods company), and many others.” (John Hayward reporting at Human Events)

More evidence that it’s hard to run successfully when you can’t bring up your record of failure, division, deceit and destruction.

Posted in 2012, Irony Is Funny, World Events | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE AND UN-MERICAN PRINCIPLE OF MULTICULTURALISM

Posted on July 11, 2012 by Richard Johnson

“Multiculturalism is a body of thought in political philosophy. . .”   

“While multiculturalism has been used as an umbrella term to characterize the moral and political claims of a wide range of disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, women, gays and lesbians, and the disabled, most theorists of multiculturalism tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities (e.g. Latinos in the U.S., Muslims in Western Europe), minority nations (e.g. Catalans, Basque, Welsh, Québécois), and indigenous peoples (e.g. Native peoples in North America, Maori in New Zealand).” —Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Continuing from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,

Justifications for Multiculturalism

  • Communitarian
  • Liberal egalitarian
  • Postcolonial

Got that? Multiculturalism is a Political Philosophy not an American Principle.

Every American coin affirms our American culture and teaches these great foundational American Principles.

  • IN GOD WE TRUST (If anything this wonderful simple official motto understates our relationship to God —in Principle.
  • LIBERTY is the pivotal enumerated unalienable Declaratory right.
  • E Pluribus Unum (Latin for “out of many one”) this founding American Principle confirms that Multiculturalism is an ANTI-AMERICAN PRINCIPLE!

The damage caused by multiculturalism is greater to recent immigrants, American blacks and American Indians than the rest of us. Immigrants as recent as the Cubans in 1959-61 got busy, learned English and became proud productive Americans. As a matter of fact, the case could be made that the progressives came up with the idea of Multiculturalism to keep blacks as victims when segregation was dismantled.

Posted in Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America | 1 Comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—WE MUST REJECT THE FALSE UN-AMERICAN PRINCIPLES OF THE LEFT

Posted on July 10, 2012 by Richard Johnson

“Progressives” began to advance False Principles early in the 20th century. Progressive thought was adopted by most Christian denominations, much of the American Academy and old-line families. Progressive “ideas” began to show up in elementary and secondary schools. (Check out John Dewey and his friends.)

The pace of Progressive growth exploded in the 1960s with the advent of television (quickly joined by Hollywood and popular music).  Over the next 25 years, new concepts, at variance with the Declaration and Constitution, took root as American principles. These principles never include God. They all smack of Dr. Rousseau, “Whoever refuses to obey will be forced to be free.” The seven false principles we currently must reject as we restore America are: Multiculturalism, Diversity, Fairness and Equality (of outcome), Tolerance, Openness, Political Correctness and Social Justice. We will face down each in successive posts.

It turned out these “superior ideas”—these new “principles”—required a new vocabulary. They quickly found it was more effective to redefine old words than to create new ones. The new definitions began on campuses of most of Americas great centers of learning. Besides public schools, these definitions could be spread into the general culture through Hollywood, popular music and the media. This process was shortened as personal computers/the internet and, currently, personal devices became ubiquitous.

We could not mention or count all the redefined words. Let’s consider a couple of examples. One is “gay marriage.” They, for progressive purposes, simply assumed each of the words meant something else—something virtually opposite—than the true meaning which is, should and must be “an exceedingly joyous man and woman united in a holy lifetime contract. When an American patriot presents an argument against “gay marriage” he has already lost. The argument can only be won by immediately and successfully challenging the false term. Have you noticed how, in the past three and half years, the words “racist” and racism” have been very broadly redefined?

“The children” was a family term before the mid-sixties. Parents (and often extended family) would make decisions “for the children.” Before they found racism to be such a goldmine, progressives used “the children” as the emotional justification for grabbing your money and your rights. To a significant degree, by the end of the Clinton presidency families had significantly yielded “for the children” responsibility to the state. Sex education comes to mind.

Speaking of rights, the progressives have been most successful at selling government programs as “rights.” A Right, of course, can and does only come from God. Government cannot give anyone a right because government has no rights. Government has nothing to give anyone until they take it first from someone else. If you have anything of value, given by government you have something that belongs rightfully to someone else.

It is not surprising that someone recently wrote, “Please stop the billionaires from taking our rights away. Having health care is a right that they want to take away. Jesus Christ would of been for health care as he was for the pour and not billionaires.”

Whenever progressives need help, government is always called on to deliver a new “right.” Just this past winter, a young leftist, named Sandra Fluke, showed up demanding on behalf of all women her reproductive rights. Of course last January 7, weeks before Ms Fluke showed up, George Stephanopoulos of ABC News asked Governor Romney, at a Republican primary debate, to comment on the risks of states denying women birth control. News reports at the time said the question was a non sequitur. Wrong. The question was the commencement of a well planned and executed rollout of a brand new “right” and Republicans are conducting a “war on women.”

There is no end to these so-called “rights” that government must provide at the cost of your treasure and freedom. “Rights,” waiting in the wings for the time the rulers of the left need them, include: Political Justice, Natural Justice, Universal Justice, Global Justice, Commutative Justice, General Justice, Reproductive Justice, Food Justice, Housing Justice, Gender Justice, Sexual Orientation Justice and Environmental Justice.

You could reasonable offer “civil rights” as an argument where the Federal Government established rights for a whole class of people. The fact is the civil rights laws of 1965 did not establish a right for one single person. Thankfully, they acted to stop the denial of God given rights by many states.

We must all be on our guard and immediately reject any and every move to destroy “our children’s” future this way.

Posted in Liberals Deatroying America, Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—RECLAIMING OUR NATIONAL CHARACTER AND REESTABLISHING TRUE AMERICAN PRINCIPLES

Posted on July 9, 2012 by Richard Johnson

Our Character; Our National Character

Many are questioning Chief Justice John Roberts Character after reading his majority opinion in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (Obamacare). They are right. It took a deficiency in character to actually take unto himself the power to rewrite a law. But, defending himself, Chief Justice Roberts pointed out that “We the People” are the ones who bear the responsibility. Paraphrasing, he said we voted for members of the political branches that said they would fundamentally transform America and when they did we expected him (the court) to bail us out.

He is right. At the same time that  we in America have the finest military force in all of history, we have become soft and irresponsible as a people. We do not just have a deficit in character in places like Hollywood, New York and elsewhere fill our screens and our music with trash and lies, we buy that trash as accept those lies. We have too often filled our State and Federal legislatures with representatives of low character on the promise of somehow getting something for nothing. We have allowed schools to debase our heritage and help degrade our culture and too often we live our lives without real purpose. Chief Justice Roberts is right. It is time. We must show the character America needs and we must step forward now.

We think, talk and write about the federal budget deficit, budget deficits in several States—deficits here and there—deficits everywhere. The truth is we have spent a generation or more expecting everything to be perfect, comfortable and easy. But shortsightedly we were not willing to see the looming challenge that is now upon us. We were not willing or ready to anticipate the hard work and character that would be required of us. But countries, like people, do not grow on the mountaintops they grow in the valleys. We are in a valley. It is going to be tough and hard but it is the environment for that can produce the growth America needs now.

I speak as one who found a deficit in my own integrity; my own character some 25 years ago. Through prayer, determination and God’s grace, I worked on my integrity (say and do the same) day by day. Could years of living with integrity actually build character? Yes, it works that way. I corrected my integrity and have been adding to my character for many years.

There are many who have a similar story. They have been prepared for this present darkness.  I expect you are one—a man or woman of character. But how did you get it and how did you build it up? I submit it is from living in your faith—especially time in prayer. As “We the People” restore America, we face, and will continue to face, fierce opposition. If I am right, we need (and will continue to need) to feed our character through regular, personal, intimate prayer.

You can now see people in your own family, living or dead, have deposited character —some more than others. It’s the same with people in your community. This is profound. It means we have George Washington’s Character. It means we have Adam’s, Jefferson’s, Franklin’s and Lincoln’s character with us as well. We have Billy Graham’s character and John Paul II’s. Don’t forget Edison and Einstein. And above all, we can and will not forget the character of those who have fought for Liberty from the Shores of Tripoli to the mountains of Afghanistan.

Now it is time to reclaim our national character. The Liberty List is a way to locate and support men and women of character who are willing to fight and win tough campaigns and then join the likes of Jim DeMint, Michele Bachmann and Paul Ryan in the very hard work of restoring our government, our Constitution and our National Character.

Most who come to this work are solid authorities on the principles we need. We only need to recount those core national principles here. Surely anyone who may need to brush up on one or two will act and “get ‘er done.”

Our Guiding National Principals

We are all created equal—equal in the eyes and the Judgment of God. That equality is not to be infringed on by the governments of men. Therefore, we are and should be equal before the law. The current false doctrine of kings (government) that give more equality to favored identity groups is not new but ancient.

The fundamentals for our principles are in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America.

  1. We are endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights (among these are life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). Enumerated or not, this is the only source of rights. Let us be as clear as Jefferson, “The God that gave us life, gave us liberty,” and every other Natural Right specifically including traditional marriage. Governments take rights—they cannot give them. Period. Did Rousseau declare, “Whoever refuses to obey will be forced to be free.”? Yes, I think he did. Now, there’s a hard one for Mr. Obama to top!
  2. We the People, in order to enjoy specific benefits of order, consistency, safety, and security, grant governments certain carefully restricted powers. Senator Obama was correct, the Constitution of the United States of America is a negative document. The Bill of Rights does not grant rights to We the People, it places them off limits to restrictions by Congress, i.e. “Congress shall make no law . . .” “Congress shall make no law . . .”

These are the principles that will guide the selection and election of the 2012 Liberty List:

  1. God given Liberty
  2. Equality before the law
  3. Natural rights
  4. Consent of the Governed
  5. Religious Freedom
  6. Private Property
  7. The Rule of Law
  8. Constitutionalism
  9. Self-Government
  10. Independence.
Posted in Liberty List 2012, Reclaiming and Restoring America | Leave a comment

THE 2012 LIBERTY LIST—STANDING AMONG THE SHREDS OF THE CONSTITUTION—

Posted on July 7, 2012 by Richard Johnson

—LET WE THE PEOPLE REESTABLISH CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT

The day after the Supreme Court handed down its Obamacare decision, Rick Joyner wrote, “The decision itself was a shock, but the rationale behind it written by Chief Justice Roberts was even more incomprehensible. No one expected Roberts to side with the liberals on the court, but if he, or any of the other conservatives did one would expect there to be some profound and previously unforeseen wisdom behind it.”

Conservatives see Supreme Court decisions in Constitutional terms. Liberals see those decisions in terms of their current construct of fairness. In other words, Liberals and Conservatives see things in terms of liberal and conservative. Constitutional lawyers do not see the law in those terms. They see things in terms of Positive Law or (rarely) Natural Law. Justice Thomas follows the Constitution under Natural Law. Justice Scalia also follows—to use Judge Bork’s term—“original intent.” We can hope Justice Alito is with this rare pair. Justice Kennedy is a (conservative) legal positivist. As of June 28th, we know that Chief Justice Roberts is solidly a legal positivist—in this case, a wildly liberal one at that.

So what are these two legal systems, why do we need to know about them and why would we run a country with two instead just one?

Natural Law is the law upon which Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence and Madison wrote the Constitution for the United States of America. It is the law that governed both sides in the War Between the States. We (America) had a right to separate from the King of England under the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” Jefferson wrote. Natural Law was a great gift from God given us through the work of Thomas Aquinas some 750 years ago. (English Common Law was adapted from Natural Law.) Natural Law is the specific reason the Declaration and the Constitution worked for a free people. Without it, there must be some sort of king.

Positive legal theory was developed at Harvard College in the late 19th century by Christopher Columbus Langdell. It holds that the legal and moral are completely separate realms. The validity of law is determined by its source and the soundness of the process of its enactment, not by a moral basis. (What could possibly go wrong with that?) Law schools still largely teach the belief that there is a science of law. Langdell was a young Harvard trained New York City lawyer and an agnostic when Charles Darwin wrote his blockbuster book, The Origin of the Species. Langdell correctly saw Darwinism as philosophy, not science and adopted it as his own. He was appointed dean of Harvard Law School in 1870 by the new Harvard President, Charles William Elliot, who was another fan of Darwin. Langdell invented the case method of studying law. Its premise is that students of the law can study appellate decisions and derive from them legal principles which can then be applied to arrive at a CORRECT decision for future cases. So Positive Law is declared to be scientific and free of morality and evolves through the case method. But legal positivism is actually based on the power of position—he who is in charge, makes the law.

As every legal positivist knows, we cannot run the country on two legal systems.  They deny that Natural Law has any standing or validity in America. If we let them continue to have their way, America will cease to be the land of the free.

That last sentence is why we need to know. Our founding and governing documents were designed for a free and virtuous people under a Sovereign God. We are now operating under a system where the rulers make the law. Remember Mr. Rousseau, “We will force you to be free.” Fellow Americans, our Constitution is in shreds. Our gift from Chief Justice Roberts is that we may no longer pretend it is not. We must reclaim our heritage and our Constitution. The constitution must be interpreted under The Law of Nature and Natures God—Natural Law. We cannot wait for reform in our law schools. We must in this election replace President Obama. We must change the makeup of the Congress. We must do it this year with the election of the men and women who will form 2012 Liberty List.

We also must restore our culture from the “values neutral” philosophy to a culture that rewards virtue and morality and we must fundamentally transform the American educational system. We must keep our eyes on the next governments (federal, state and local). We must also commence our work on our American culture and educational system. In the words of the great poet, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, “Let us, then, be up and doing. . .” And in the words of President G. W. Bush, “We will not tire, we will not falter and we will not fail.

Posted in Liberty List 2012 | Leave a comment