Just as the anti-war artists of the 60’s expressed their political views through music, so too are an increasing number of artists of the TEA Party movement who refuse to keep silent about the destruction of this great nation by many who ironically subscribed to those radical, anti-government views of the 60’s counterculture movement.

James Kole - American Folk Blues Artist

One such patriot artist, whose musical style is reminiscent of the folk music of the 60’s, but with a contemporary blues/rock twist, is American Folk Blues artist James Kole.

We have been fans of James Kole’s for over two years since first stumbling upon his YouTube channel, impressed not only by his positive, pro-America lyrics, but also by his professionally produced videos, unique musical and vocal style, and his captivating delivery.

James is no newcomer to patriotic-infused songwriting promoting individual liberty and love of country.  His 1998 full-length release, Liberty, offered listeners a glimpse of what was to come over the years and culminate into his 7th full-length album (released July 4th, 2010):  Songs For Freedom in which he sings about the American Revolution, Frederick Douglass, the Constitution, U.S. Sovereignty, current uncertain times, and much more.

“Rockin’ the stage with a force like thunder”, James Kole’s musical talent is mesmerizing and his energetic aura commanding.  A singer/songwriter from Scottsdale, Arizona, Kole has impressed audiences with his unique blend of blues, rock, and American folk, earning him the title “Local Legend” in the 2008 edition of Perfectify Magazine.

Outside the local scene, his music has a long list of film and television credits, including projects for Miramax, HBO, Washington Square Films, MTV, PBS, and even Red Bull energy drinks.

In 2003, Kole was awarded the Best Original Song at the Saguaro Film Festival for his hit, Big Orange Sun.  James has shared stages with The Doobie Brothers, Nashville country artist Pat Green, SNL star Victoria Jackson, and many more.

If you build it, they will come.

I have been concerned about our Republic for years now. I have been bothered by the lack of true understanding about our Republic, and that included me! I read the Constitution again with my daughter during spring break a couple of years ago and afterwards felt compelled to reach for a more thorough understanding of our founding principles.

This led me to launch a foundation, “Constituting America” to share my enthusiasm about the relevancy of our founding documents and the necessity to make sure our youth had choices in their education about the “facts” in a non-partisan way. This is also true for adults.

I always knew that big government was not the answer but it wasn’t until I studied the Federalist Papers that I truly understood why. I further imprinted them into my psyche by writing 85 essays on the 85 Federalist Papers, that are now available on Constituting America’s website. It’s all there for us in the Constitution and the Federalist Papers; we just have to take the time to inquire. As John Adam’s said, “Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people.” If we, and our children, do not know our rights, then we will not know when they are taken away from us. I say, “Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge of the United States Constitution.”

I decided to start my own radio show podcast because I love to learn and I feel passionate about our country, America, which truly is the last great hope. I also started my own radio show because I feel as if I need to be doing something to try to “sound the alarm,” as Publius states in the Federalist Papers. Here I can express my opinion. So many of our nation’s youth and citizens are “default liberals,” to quote Andrew Breitbart, because they simply have no other realm of reasoning. Our culture currently limits choices, in the press, academia, movies and music. I, a person who has been a part of the show biz culture, feel a need to address this bias.

I am blessed because Richard Frish and Jim Graci at 570 KLIF were listening and they have offered me the fabulous opportunity to broaden my show beyond podcast media. I now have a slot for my show on Saturday nights at 10:00 pm Central on 570 KLIF. Yee haw! I am so excited. I hope, if you are reading this, that you will join me. It is live and you may call in!

My special guests for my debut show last week were Andrew Breitbart, Karl Rove, and Kelly Shackelford. This Saturday’s special guests embody an Alaskan theme, Governor Sarah Palin Rep. Michele Bachmann and my co-star from Northern Exposure, Rob Morrow.

The Janine Turner Show; American Exposure. Hollywood Flair, Washington Savvy, American True Grit. Come and join me! Tune in for the shows and join my LIVE “after-show” chats on my Facebook fan page. You may click the link on my website homepage to KLIF to listen to the show LIVE.

Toward the end of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Benjamin Franklin walked out of Independence Hall and a woman ran up to him and asked, “Sir, sir – what have you given us? A monarchy or a republic?” He replied, “A Republic, ma’am, if you can keep it.”

 I want to keep it, don’t you?

So I’ve been plinking around at my main hobby – music – for years.  Just playing for my own amusement, or so it started out.   Now I’ve got a band, we sound pretty good, we gig around town sometimes… (played for the wounded warriors’ Ride-2-Recovery event in Ventura, and we’re playing two gigs for the “Republican Party Animals” – one at the end of May and another in June)… and between that and film and TV assignments, I keep fairly busy.

Flashback to the last presidential campaign, 2007.   I meet a bunch of conservatives in Hollywood.  Who knew?!   In liberal Hollywood, there are actually a bunch of folks who work in the film industry and think a lot like I do.  Limited government, more personal freedom, individual responsibility, yada yada.  I’d been a conservative for some time but the risks to our nation now seem much more pronounced and pressing than at any other time in my life.

And the primary threat I see is not from without – but from within.

—–

I realized some time ago we are in a culture war.  On the one side we have those who love America, warts and all, and are proud to live in a country that stands as a beacon for freedom to the rest of the world.  And on the other side, we have those who don’t think much of our country or our heritage.  They blame America first for all the ills of the world; they mock and ridicule our time-honored traditions and cultural institutions like family, church, and country;  they espouse the notion that our Constitution is a “living document” to be altered and “shaped” at the latest indignant whim of a Liberal activist judge.  Our guiding document – the United States Constitution – they regard as a mere vestige of a stained and spotted past, an anachronistic relic irrelevant to our times.  This side of the argument works tirelessly to “fundamentally transform” our shining City on the Hill into something unrecognizable, something European…something foreign.   This side apparently has a big problem with a nation of rugged individualists who believe in Honor, Virtue, Freedom, and the unfettered and equal opportunity to, on your own, achieve a dream, limited only by your own talent, ambition, and perseverance.  

The vitriol is ramping up – between those demanding personal responsibility and those pushing entitlements.  Those who want liberty and self-reliance, and those who want to be taken care of.  A nation of doers and builders and innovators, or the nanny state.

I’ve seen firsthand both sides in action – and though the Tea Party keeps it relatively civil and orderly –the Leftists use raucous, intimidating and at times violent tactics to push their agenda.

—–

When your own personal constitution is dedicated to Lucifer, it’s easy to understand all the hand-wringing surrounding the reading of the actual U.S. Constitution among those in the media and the Left (but we repeat ourselves). 

But remember…

Don’t question their patriotism.

Sadly, the dead white males who imposed the Constitution on America enumerated only negative rights that limit the power of the government over its citizens.  But if you squint your eyes and look beyond obstacles like the plain text, lurking in there somewhere behind the penumbras and emanations is the positive right of every American to be a TV star.  Those with MAD are not cretins to be shunned but civil rights visionaries at the edge of a new frontier of governmental largess and probably a lot of profitable litigation.

It’s obvious that American society has failed the Heene family.  After he and his brood’s triumphant appearances on Wife Swap, Heene was left media-deficient and was forced to feed his addiction with crude YouTube videos.  In one, he speculated that Hilary Clinton is a shape-shifting space reptile, which would be totally cool if true.  In another, he claimed that he spoke to aliens at a local fast food restaurant, which is actually pretty typical, at least at Southern California fast food joints.

This sad state of affairs was a direct result of the deep, black emptiness in Heene’s life that could never be filled by superficial things like work, religion or family.  Like all MAD-men, he craves, needs, must have the validation that only comes from having his mug flashing across America’s television screens.  He not only wants his MTV, he has to have it.  And we owe it to him.

But, typical of the kind of divided America left behind by the Bush regime, we failed to give it to him.  TLC, that paragon of class television, passed on his reality series proposal.  What is clear is that Heene’s rights have been grossly violated – this likely constitutes a full-fledged hate crime.  So his actions are understandable, even admirable, in light of the oppression visited upon him.  Roping his wife and kids into a project that had cops, pilots and others chasing a glorified Mylar “Happy Birthday” balloon across Colorado was not a giant scam but a cry for help.

–

America – will you answer the challenge?  They certainly would in Europe.  Surely America can spend a few billion dollars to ensure that unfortunate victims like Heene can have their 15 minutes and then some.  Is it too much to ask America’s wealthiest to pay just a bit more so MAD victims can receive the validation that our Constitution clearly holds they are owed?

Our government must address this terrible crisis!  The only real question is the extent of the MAD public option – should the government undertake to directly provide media access in a “single media” system?  Or should it allow – at least for a while – private media to continue, but with a “public media exchanges” designed to provide the competition that is utterly unknown to media companies now.  However, to bend the cost curve down it can cost no more than $900 billion.  Perhaps we can impose a tax on those with a “cadillac” media profile.

And don’t let yourself by distracted by the Right Wing’s lies - this plan will not provide free media coverage to aliens, whether they are illegal, cabinet officials, or hanging out at your local Burger King.

Senator Snowe, I think I hear history calling again.

Or, as an alternative, we could just express our contempt for dumbasses like Richard Heene and stop celebrating the antics of every buffoon without a shame gene.

President Obama has entered into a special trade pact with Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. Once the treaty is signed doctors and teachers from Cuba and Nicaragua offer their services to help the American “poor.” As soon as they enter the United States and become embedded in the countryside, they immediately begin organizing and indoctrinating the “poor” as to how oppressed they are and how they are entitled to the same lifestyle, privileges and properties that the “rich” enjoy. 

Honduran President Roberto Micheletti and Chris Burgard

The “rich” are now defined as anyone who has more than two bedrooms in their home. In this imaginary, future America, President Obama owns several mansions across the nation, yet he declares that it is the patriotic duty of every “rich” homeowner to turn their 3rd and 4th bedrooms over to the “poor.”   

President Obama raises the minimum wage by 60% percent. The “poor” hail him as their champion. Unable to meet the federal minimum wage requirement, thousands of small businesses close. Overnight 7,740,000 Americans lose their jobs. The American economy slumps even further. 

Taiwanese investors agree to build new hydro electric power plants to revitalize the failing American energy grid. However, they rescind their offer when President Obama begins to talk of nationalizing energy production. Other foreign investors take notice and foreign investment in America stalls. 

Even though the country cannot afford it, President Obama starts to subsidize gasoline. He gives the” poor” free electricity. He then makes a deal with Hugo Chavez and the Iranians to give free tractors to the poor. In the most rural parts of America every public works project has a big sign on it: “This has been built for you by Barack Obama!” 

The “poor” people love him for it. 

President Obama also makes huge concessions to the labor unions. Teachers now get paid whether they are in the classroom or on strike. As a result instead of a 220 day school year, American public schools are now only open 70 days per year. Public school students are hit the hardest. They soon fall far behind the few American students who can still afford private school. However, with the teacher’s union in his debt, President Obama now has a ready demonstration force that can be mobilized for public rallies at a moment’s notice. 

About this time, President Obama loses trust in the Secret Service and military personnel assigned to protect him. House minority leader, John Boehner and others believe that the President has his own private security force made up of Nicaraguans and other foreign nationals. 

With the end of his second term in sight, President Obama decides that he doesn’t want to leave office. He banks on his charisma and the devotion of his cult followers to allow him to follow in the footsteps of Hugo Chavez.  

President Obama declares that he will add a referendum to the ballots for the upcoming Presidential primaries. There will be a special box on the ballots that Americans can check in order to eliminate presidential term limits. 

But Americans rise up against this attack on their Constitution. There is not a single printing company in the United States that will print the illegal ballots.

With the exception of only three legislators, the entire Congress votes against the President. Undeterred President Obama again turns to his friend, Hugo Chavez. Millions of illegal ballots are printed in Venezuela for use in the United States. 

President Obama orders Joint Chief of Staff, Admiral Mullen to distribute the illegal ballots to every polling place across the nation. When Admiral Mullen refuses, the president fires him. 

The US Supreme Court orders Admiral Mullen reinstated and the illegal ballots confiscated. 

President Obama then takes his cause to the streets. Organizers, the unions and the “poor” rally to his side. The mob breaks into an air force base and seizes the illegal ballots by force. 

In this fictional, future United States, there are no articles of impeachment, but the law does apply to all citizens equally, even the President.           

Article 239

The citizen who has served as head of the Executive branch shall not serve again as President or Vice President of the Republic….He who violates this disposition or proposes its reform….shall immediately be removed from office. 

The Supreme Court orders President Obama arrested. On a Sunday morning at 6am, Admiral Mullen and the military carry out that arrest warrant. 

In this future, fictional United States, the office of Vice President is vacant. Vice President Biden had recently resigned, so according to Constitutional succession the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is sworn in as President. 

World reaction is swift. Within hours, the Organization of American States, the European Union and the United Nations all stand against Nancy Pelosi’s administration. Putin, Calderon and Gordon Brown stand in solidarity with the Castro brothers, Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez, in demanding that Barack Obama be reinstated immediately. 

With the exception of Germany, Panama and Israel, the United States stands alone against the world. 

There is reported troop movement on the US Southern border. Hugo Chavez threatens to move in with Nicaraguan and Venezuelan troops in an effort to “restore democracy” and help Barack Obama avoid a civil war. Americans live in fear of foreign invasion. 

Foreign operatives and paid organizers spread cash and chaos wherever television cameras are likely to be found. They threaten American citizens. 

Americans are afraid to leave their houses. 

The pro-Obama factions immediately take to the streets. The rallies number in the hundreds and sometimes thousands. The demonstrators call each other “comrade.” Posters of Che Guevara are predominate among the protesters. Red bandannas and clothing are every where. Communist leaders from the 1980s direct graffiti artists to blanket the capitol streets in propaganda. The protesters burn diesel fuel and tires in the streets. They carry a blind old lady off of a bus and then torch the vehicle. They fire bomb a Popeye’s restaurant while there are still women and children inside. At one demonstration, they cut holes in an airport fence and charge government forces. A young man is killed. 

In response, pro-Constitution rallies soon pop up. The demonstrators wear red, white and blue clothes. They don’t litter. They don’t burn things. They don’t attack security forces, vandalize or burn businesses. The pro constitution rallies number in the tens of thousands. The biggest rally hits one hundred thousand.  But the Main Stream Media focuses almost exclusively on the Obama rallies and the violence that they create. The outside world never knows the full extent of popular support that the US Constitution carries within its borders. 

Fortunately for us this is a purely fictional future United States. I do not believe that President Obama would ever do these things. Unfortunately for the people of Honduras, this is their reality. Ex President Manuel Zelaya did all of these things. The story you have just read is true. The President and the country were changed to put it into an American perspective. 

I spent two weeks in July and August covering the events in Honduras for Pajamas Media. I interviewed, spoke and traveled with campesinos living with no electricity and dirt floors, teachers, military officers and enlisted personnel, missionaries, business leaders, national police, the House Minority leader, the Chief Supreme Court Justice, the ex First Lady: Xiomara Castro, hard core ex president Manuel Zelaya supporters, community organizers, militant revolutionaries and the current Honduran president: Roberto Micheletti. 

I lost count of how many times I heard…”We never thought this could happen to us! We are a democracy.” 

Hondurans were shocked when their democratically elected leader, Manuel Zelaya, began shifting dramatically to the far left and began to adopt the policies of Hugo Chavez. 

After Manuel Zelaya was arrested and removed from office, Hondurans were stunned when President Obama called this a military coup. Within hours, President Obama stood in solidarity with Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez and the Castro brothers in demanding the return to power of Manuel Zelaya. 

Manuel Girbal, a retired Honduran Army officer wanted me to know that the Honduran military swears an oath to the Constitution, not the President. In his eyes, by protecting the constitution, the military was protecting the people. 

Chief Supreme Court Justice, Magistrado Presidente Rivera explained to me that the Honduran Constitution does not have articles of impeachment, but that the law applies equally to all men, even the president. Manuel Zelaya broke constitutional law and that is why the Supreme Court issued an arrest warrant and ordered the army to serve it. 

Later, as Honduran troops deployed once more to guard the Presidential Palace and the Marriot Hotel from pro Zelaya demonstrators, I was asked by an Army Lieutenant why the United States had abandoned their friends in Honduras. Honduras gets a lot of criticism from its neighbors for leasing Soto Kano airbase to the Americans. Soto Kano is strategically located and plays a huge part in stopping the flow of drugs into the US. This lieutenant had served five months in Iraq because President Bush asked him. He wanted to know why President Obama had now abandoned them. 

From the president on down to the peasants, from the right to the left, Hondurans are asking their Northern cousins to come and see for themselves what is going on in Honduras. 

Unfortunately for them, Michael Jackson died the same week that Manuel Zelaya was removed from office. It was Michael Jackson that dominated American television screens. 

Regular Honduran Presidential elections are scheduled for November 29. Hondurans are hoping to have free elections and a new president. According to the constitution, President Micheletti is ineligible to ever hold the office of president again. 

The EU has cut off over 90 million dollars in aid to Honduras. The US has cut off military aid and suspended diplomatic visas. All joint US/Honduran narco/military operations have been suspended. Labor unions across the planet have demanded that longshoremen refuse to unload Honduran fruit and coffee cargos. Between this and the US tourism warnings, the Honduran economy is taking a huge hit. 

In spite of all of this punishment, Honduras is standing tall. Everyday that they do not cave into international pressure brings them one day closer to their Presidential elections.

Over and over Hondurans told me that they would rather have six months of hell, than a lifetime of communism. 

In the two months since Manuel Zelaya was arrested, Daniel Ortega has declared that Nicaragua needs to change their constitution in order to extend his stay in power.   

Oscar Arias, the president of Costa Rica and the man that Hillary Clinton put in charge of mediations between Zelaya and the Micheletti administration came out last week with similar demands on the Costa Rican constitution.

 There are lessons to be learned here and there are friendships that should not be forgotten. 

Those of us who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. Those of us who do not pay accurate attention to the plight of our friends and neighbors may not fare much better.

We [Americans] see America, from the Pilgrims who signed the Mayflower Compact to the Biblical scholars… who birthed the nation, to the spirit of sacrifice and charity that thrives to this very day, not as a nation of Christians (for that freedom is at the deepest core of our common philosophy) but as a Christian nation.

It seems that there is a growing belief that because our Founders were stalwart advocates for religious liberty, and because some of them had very nuanced and sometimes cynical views about organized religion, the United States was somehow conceived to be a secular nation. This belief is not only untrue, but detrimental to an adequate understanding of the underlying political philosophy of the founding, not least of all because it envisions the government as the nation instead of merely the organization through which the nation conducts its civil affairs, and more importantly because it betrays the singular belief that undergirds the entire American experiment: That the rights of man come not from government but from God.

When the Founders crafted the Constitution of the United States, they were not setting about to create a nation; they were setting about to create a system of government. The people of the United States had successfully waged war against Great Britain, formed alliances with foreign powers, brokered trade, and secured national debt before the current system of government was ever established. The Constitution merely created a system of administrative and judicial structures meant to represent the nation and to conduct the affairs of the people of that nation. This is perhaps best evidenced by the opening words to the document itself: “We the people of the United States… establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” The United States already existed. Its people created the Constitution to “form a more perfect Union… and to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

The birth of the nation occurred in 1776 when the second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence. It was this document that “dissolved the political bands” which connected the people of America to the people of Great Britain and assumed for them “the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” entitled them. It was also in this document that the Founders outlined the uniquely American philosophy of the legitimate rights of the governed. “Self-evident” truths, they called them: that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator (not afforded by their government) with certain un-alienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

Governments, says the Declaration, are formed to help man secure these rights and derive their power only from the consent of the people themselves. If government should exceed the people’s authority, or encroach upon the rights man received from his Creator (also called, in official documents by the same congress, “Providence,” “Almighty God,” “the Common Father,” “Nature’s God,” “God,” “Supreme Being,” “Holy Ghost,” and, wait for it, “Jesus Christ”), it was “the Right of the People to alter or abolish it.” The Founders then go on to cite, as the moral authority from which their philosophy is derived (rectitude as they called it), the “Supreme Judge” of the world, and call upon “Divine Providence” for their protection in carrying out their God-given rights.

It was hardly a secular origin then for these United States. Instead, a founding document that proposes a theory, really a theology of government, never enacted before. The people of this country are entitled by God to independent statehood. They were created by God with rights that no government can legitimately take away. Their philosophy was deemed morally correct because it has been judged so by God, and God will protect them in the execution of war against those that would subjugated them in violation of that philosophy. This is how the Founders viewed rightful governance, and this is the sort of government that they sought to give life when, a decade later, they drafted the Constitution of the United States.

Of the four claims about God and Americans outlined in the Declaration, it was the idea that man was made by God to be free that was the most radical, and which was so pivotal. The British press mocked it openly. It is, however, at the very heart of the founding ideology. If it is God who made men free, then Liberty is not a pragmatic imperative; it is a moral one. Governments that encroach on that liberty are not only violating the preferences of the governed, they are violating the very intention of God for government. For the Founders, this idea would fundamentally redefine the relationship between government and citizen. Man does not exist to be governed; governments exist to protect man’s freedom. Man does not owe government anything, other than what is necessary to aid that government in securing his basic rights. Likewise, government does not owe man anything other than protection from those who would intrude upon his freedom, be it his fellow citizen, foreign enemies, or the government itself.

It is this idea, above all others, that marked this country as unique among the nations of the world. It is an idea so deeply held by our Founders that many actually feared making references to the rights of man in the Constitution itself. They didn’t think they needed to. They also knew that to do so might one day be interpreted to mean that those rights were not natural at all, but rather were gifts from a benevolent master called the state. When the Bill of Rights was finally added, the Congress selected the language very carefully to make clear that the document was not bestowing rights on the people, but limiting the rights of government: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble…,” “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” “The right of the people to be secure… shall not be violated…” The Constitution doesn’t grant man rights; God does. The Constitution only protects those rights from the government. The idea that the Founders believed government must exist independent of God is thereby false since their own view of the rightful place of government was in the protection of the rights granted to man by his Creator.

The tired argument that the Founders were not Christians but Deists is not only false (there were more overtly Christian men among the Founders than even supposed Deists by orders of magnitude), but more importantly, it is irrelevant. Whatever the nuances of their personal faiths, the Founders were to-a-man theists, believers in God, and in the Christian tradition. While some of them, men like Franklin, Adams, and Jefferson, were skeptical of many of the miraculous claims of the Bible, they were none-the-less scholarly about and reverent toward what they saw as its philosophy, and its God. They may not have been Christians by the standards of the church, but they were certainly Christians by the standards of atheists. They believed in the God of the Bible and believed faith was critical to the workings of a free society. Not only that, but they made clear what they thought about the relationship between God and government in both word and deed. Franklin called for prayer at the Constitutional Convention and suggested spending government revenue on chaplains. Adams declared the Constitution was “made only for a moral and religious people…” and wrote the Massachusetts State Constitution, which required that its governors pledge their Christian faith in order to serve (This was considered a legitimate state law under the original reading of the First and Tenth Amendment). Jefferson spent federal revenue on Bibles, declared that the Bible should be taught in public schools, and approved of the use of federal buildings for church gatherings – including the capital building where he personally attended services during his presidency. Oh, and he wrote the Declaration of Independence.

Of course Jefferson also, in a letter to the Danbury Baptists, first coined the popular phrase, “Separation of Church and State,” which has been used for so long to inform a reading of the ‘Establishment Clause’ which seeks to excise all religious expression from public institutions. So how could he approve of the innumerable expressions of faith by himself and the government under his watch? It is important here to bear in mind the context of Jefferson’s thinking.

The Danbury Baptists were concerned that the First Amendment’s very existence might one day be taken to imply that it was the government who gave men religious freedom, not God, and therefore imply government could also take that freedom away (a possibility Alexander Hamilton had also raised in Federalist No. 84). The Baptists feared that this left open the possibility that at some point in the future the government might claim for itself the power to enforce religious edicts through civil coercion. This fear was not without historical precedent.

The original European settlers of what would become the United States of the Revolution were almost exclusively British. They were also immensely religious. That’s why they were here. After a millennia of state-religion mandated by Rome, Henry VIII had rejected the authority of the Pope in Britain and created a state-religion of his own. The Church of England made the king not only the ultimate political power in the land, but the ultimate religious authority as well. A violation of Henry’s religious positions was a violation of the law, and a violation of the law was heresy. The punishment was severe: Beheading, hanging, burning at the stake… Terrible things happen when civil and religious authority are mingled together.

The problem for Henry, and for Rome, was that a Reformation was also taking place. Men like Martin Luther and William Tyndale (who Henry had strangled and burned) had begun translating the Bible into common languages, giving the people the opportunity to explore God for themselves. What they discovered surprised them. In the Book of Exodus, God establishes a civil leader for his people in Moses. He also establishes a religious leader in Aaron. Then he does something really interesting: He commands that they remain separate forever. If the king tries to supersede the religious authority of the priesthood, God will destroy him, as he does in 2 Chronicles, cursing a king named Uzziah for conducting a religious rite in the temple. Of course, God was God of the state, as well as the religion. He gave guidance to Moses just as surely as he did to Aaron. He just precluded the civil leader from also being the religious leader. Undoubtedly, God understood that without that distinction, all kings would be like Henry VIII. Separation of church and state, then, is actually a Biblical principle.

When Jefferson’s own American forefathers, the Pilgrims, took sanctuary from religious persecution in this new world, they sought to be true to the Biblical teachings that their former rulers had violated. In America, as in Israel thousands of years before, government and religious authority would be forever separated, though just as in Israel, God would be God of both. God and religion, after all, are not the same thing. One is the Supreme Being over all, and the other is the institution by which he is taught and worshiped. Jefferson understood this distinction, which is why he could assure the Danbury Baptists that there was a “wall of separation between church and state,” ensuring that the government would never dictate or enforce religious decrees, while at the same time he also recognized God though the government, and based the legitimacy of both on him.

There is far more to say on this subject than could possibly be explored in one sitting: The fact that the opening lines of the most important state law concerning religious freedom discuss how God made the mind free though it was within his Almighty power not to as Lord of both and Author of our religion (Jefferson). There is Washington’s Presidential warning that no man can call himself a patriot and oppose religion, since it is intrinsically linked to free government. There is Congress authorizing an official translation of the Bible and Thanksgiving Proclamations calling upon Jesus Christ to forgive of our national sins. For nearly two centuries government was separated from religious authority by Jefferson’s wall, but there was simply no separation of the government and God. The Bible was read in schools, there were prayers at most public functions, churches continued to meet in federal buildings, and America’s rich Christian heritage was taught and celebrated, not denied, suppressed, and scorned. To be sure, there were always Americans of diverse faiths, but as the nation was settled by Christians, founded on the principles of Christianity, and peopled by an overwhelming majority of Christian citizens, it didn’t seem a terrible thing to consider her a Christian Nation. It was not until 1947, when the Supreme Court heard a case called Everson vs Board of Education, that the modern understanding of America as a secular nation was first introduced. In a stunning act of judicial activism, the court declared that Jefferson, in his Danbury Letter, in contradiction to earlier court rulings on the subject and to everything Jefferson himself had ever written including the Declaration and the actual letter itself, must have intended that the government be legally bound to secularism. This effectively turned two centuries of American history on its head. In the sixty years since, generations of Americans have been fed a radical reinterpretation of the Founders’ intent. Government, we are now taught, must protect the people from public expressions of, or support for, religion. God must be stripped from the public square, which is in large part why the true history of our founding has been so stripped from our schools. In this newly interpreted separation, the chief concern of our Founders seems to have been preventing anyone from encountering religion at all. That they often argued publicly that the republic could not survive without religion is ignored entirely, as is their own reliance on God for their authority to create the government in the first place. Like so many other issues in post-New Deal America, if the courts disagree with the Founders, they simply re-invent them, avoiding the sticky democratic practices of debate and legislation all together.

Since God no longer exists in government, and his history there is no longer taught, is it any wonder that millions upon millions of Americans believe, in utter opposition to the founding philosophy, that our rights come from the government? Where else would they come from? And should it be any surprise if those same Americans desire that the government give them other things as well? After all, if our rights are not by the grace of God but by the grace of government, then whoever controls the government has the ultimate authority over man. Government by definition can do no wrong. This is precisely the kind of thinking our Founders literally warred against. It is also precisely why Americans of all faiths should be proud to own America’s Christian Heritage, and why without it, America is lost.

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.” – Thomas Jefferson, “Deist”

“Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian Nation…” - Barack Obama, “Christian”

I suggest you continue going to the town hall meetings and voice your concerns.  And, do not be afraid to get angry.  The Democrat and Republican Congressmen must know they will not be reelected if HR 3200 passes as it is currently written.  But, please, do not get violent.  Violence at these meetings will do nothing except make the opposition look weak and dumb, and hurt the path of democracy.  Violence at these meetings is similar to me being called a racist this week because I stated on a public forum that HR 3200 should not pay for medical services for illegal immigrants.  Remember the protest ways of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King.

The attendance at the town halls is working!  Within the past twenty-four hours, a few Senate and House Members, including one Democrat, stated they will not pass a bill with the current language regarding even the possibility of the so called death panels.  Keep up the good work America!  The people are winning! 

The power of the people brings to mind the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which is very short, but is also one of the most controversial sections of the document.  There are many people who believe that it is the primary cause of the Civil War: i.e. did the states, not the Federal Government have the right to determine whether to be slave or free?  Ronald Reagan believed in the amendment more than anything else, as did Thomas Jefferson.  It simply states in its entirety:  “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.” 

There are many people that feel that the Constitution was already clear on this issue and that the Tenth Amendment is actually a redundancy.  However, the Supreme Court has, within the last 25 years, actually used the Tenth Amendment as a rationale in deciding a few cases.  See, e.g. New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), and Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985).  Prior to these cases, the rationale used exclusively by the Supreme Court for limiting States’ rights was the Commerce Clause of the Constitution which is very simple on its face.  Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution states:  “[The Congress shall have power] to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.”  This simple phrase as interpreted by the Supreme Court has given Congress the authority to slowly strip away powers granted to the States specifically in the Constitution and through the Tenth Amendment.  In its most simplistic form, the Supreme Court has determined that everything legislated by Congress has some effect on Interstate Commerce and therefore, is within the power of the Federal Government.  Maybe, the Supreme Court is now changing its analysis?

So, will power come back to the States or the people in the future?  If Ron Paul had been elected President, the answer would have definitely been yes.  In fact, we would be looking at the end of the Federal Reserve too which is probably a good thing.  But, unfortunately the answer is currently “no”.  President Obama, through his executive powers and the use of Congress, is turning the Federal Government into the ultimate power.  Health Care is just one example. 

Any normal interpretation of the Tenth Amendment would imply that health care and its regulation should be a power reserved to the states and/or the people.  This is also the case with marriage and other personal issues.  However, by the power of the Commerce Clause, the Federal Government will be able to regulate it unless the Supreme Court radically changes precedent. 

I wonder why no one is bringing up the Tenth Amendment at these town hall meetings.  Maybe, people should start arguing it while they are mentioning the other problems with HR 3200.  Give the power back to the people in deciding personal issues, including, but not limited to health care.

A few closing thoughts.  In the last week, my favorite target, Nancy Pelosi, put her foot in her mouth again.  How dare she say that citizens protesting HR 3200 are un-American.  If anything, she is being un-American for making that statement.  Remember, freedom of speech and assembly is a right in this country.  I suggest Her Arrogance, Ms. Pelosi, read the Constitution before she opens her mouth in the future.  We already know she is not going to read HR 3200 even though she allegedly drafted it.  The least she can do is read the Constitution.  In fact, it should be a requirement that all Congressmen have a copy of that little document in their pocket 24 hours a day.  It is good reference material, especially when they’re thinking of violating it.

Lastly, I would like to state that one of the main proponents of the HR 3200 is Joe Sestak from Pennsylvania.  For all of my readers in his district and surrounding districts in Pennsylvania, let him know his job is on the line.  This man is thinking of running against Arlen Specter and has delusions of even greater power.  I have seen him speak.  He is a true liberal and must be stopped in the same way Nancy Pelosi and her other cronies must be stopped by voting them out of office.

On the economy, do not let the President’s propaganda machine fool you, this recession is definitely not over.  In fact, it appears that we are in the first deflationary spiral in this country since the Great Depression.  Based upon the CPI announcement this morning, consumer prices have fallen 2.1% over the past twelve months.  The last time that happened was 1950.  And, it has not happened this extensively since the Great Depression.  And, I do not know if it has ever happened at a time when the government is printing so much paper money.  If we were not printing paper money, how low would prices have fallen; ten percent, twenty percent or more?

Last week, I failed to mention that the Jekyll Island book about the Federal Reserve which I recommended was referred to me by my good friend Robert Spaeth.  It is also recommended reading by Ron Paul.  Again, check it out.

In closing, I would like to repeat.  Keep up the good work at the town hall meetings.  Let us destroy HR 3200 and hopefully, the Senate will be able to write a true bipartisan health care reform bill.  It is the only chance we have as the Senate might try to stop the Democratic onslaught in the House. 

©2009 by Frank T. DeMartini.  Permission to copy will be freely given upon request.

#1: Us Citizens.

#2: You elected officials.

I really prefer writing long pieces on why Ernest Borgnine, Lee Marvin and Johnny Rotten rule. It’s more fun to talk about how everything in popular culture that everyone else likes actually sucks, and I’m even going to provide some inspirational music selections below. But duty calls. Right now, a bunch of people whose salaries you and I pay and who work for us are telling us to shut up and do as we’re told.

That’s just not gonna happen.

Message to our representatives: Hey Bub, I didn’t swear allegiance to the Constitution and deploy twice to defend it to shrug my shoulders and say, “Well, guess that old First Amendment thing doesn’t apply to me” just because you’re tired of hearing about how completely and thoroughly your plan to turn our health care system into another DMV sucks. Here’s how it’s going to be: Like it or not, you’re going to stand there, zip your pie hole for once, and listen to your constituents.

You may not like us mere citizens daring to question you. You may turn to your entourage, gasping in horror because some mere business owner has the nerve to ask you why you think shooting his taxes up over 60% so some deadbeat who doesn’t want to fork over the money to buy his own policy can get covered for free is a good idea. I know it must be a shock to realize that you aren’t some minor potentate, immune to criticism and answering only to yourself. But that’s too damn bad. This is a democracy, and you work for us.

It’s time to remember that the key word in the phrase “public servant” is “servant.” You’re not our “masters,” not our “rulers,” and not even our “new insect overlords.” You’re our servants. So serve. Start off by bringing me a draft Dos Equis lager, with a lime, pronto. Oh, and vote against socialized medicine.

And another thing, Mac. Like the rest of your employers, I don’t dig being called a “Nazi” by one of your little lefty functionaries. First, it’s inaccurate. Maybe your flunkie’s commie professor at Bennington never taught him enough to know that the Nazis were on his side of the poli-sci spectrum and not mine. The word “Nazi” is short for “National Socialist,” not “National Free-Market Supply-Side Libertarian with a Strong Grounding in Traditional Values.” Perhaps I could be called a “Nfmsslwasgitvi,” but I’m sure as hell not a “Nazi.” Second, me and my ancestors have protected this country from Nazis, commies, thugs and other assorted scumbags for generations, and if someone freaking calls me a Nazi to my face someone’s getting knocked on his fifth point of contact.

And stop impugning my motives, Dude. Supposedly all of us who aren’t thrilled about this health care reform abomination are speaking up only because we’re in the pay of the evil Big Insurance and Big Pharmaceuticals. To that, I ask a question – Where’s my check? I don’t want to be saying that this is idiotic for free like a sucker.

Now, if we speak, will they listen? Oh yeah. In 1986, I spent the summer drinking Rolling Rock and chasing girls in Washington, activities I interrupted occasionally to intern on the Hill for Congressman Duncan Hunter (Duncan ruled – he kept a 12 gauge in his office closet and thought we should give the Contras the Bomb). The point is that I remember the intense interest the representatives had in constituent contacts – they counted every letter, categorized them and paid very, very, very close attention to the mood of the voters.

You better believe that every member who doesn’t represent a district to the left of Berkeley is feeling the heat and shuddering in terror at the prospect of having to find a real job in January 2011 if he or she votes wrong on this one. Not everyone gets to run for re-election in a district where 72.5% of the voters agree with the proposition “U.S. out of North America.“ Write, call, fax, email, and best of all, show up at a town hall meeting or at the local office – it matters.

And when you speak out – and you must speak out, even if your name goes into the big database of wrongthinkers at Central Committee headquarters (Note to der Commissar: There are two “H’s” in “Schlichter”) – here are some basic principles that you should demand that any health care reform plan incorporate:

1. Health care is not a right. You are not entitled to someone else handing it to you for free any more than you are entitled to free Special K, a free condo in Maui or a free Nintendo Wii.

2. Everyone is responsible for obtaining and paying for his own and his family’s health care. But isn’t it true that some folks just don’t have the money? Well, here’s a powerful wealth-building strategy that I’ll let the freeloaders out there in on for nothing: Get a job. Then you can buy your own damn health insurance. I work three jobs and I’m getting a masters degree. I’m not loving the idea of paying your freight too, so roll off the couch, do a push-up, and start eyeballing the Craigslist want ads.

3. I actually sort of respect illegal aliens – anyone who will swim a river, cross a desert and dodge cops to work for minimum wage cooking me Big Macs is the kind of guy I want in America. But that doesn’t mean I want to pick up the tab when one gets a rash. Go home, get in line, then welcome back when your turn comes.

4. The government is so wrapped up in health care that right now you effectively have no choices.  I know this because I pay for my employees’ health care and I have a wide variety of one choice at one price among two companies. Thanks for “helping” me choose by eliminating all choice, California.

5. As a lawyer, let me draw the fire of my peers. The malpractice system is nearly as big a scam as global warming – the only difference is a few people actually believe in global warming. Everyone in the legal field knows that the malpractice system is a racket.

6. The government must have nothing to do with providing health care. Nada. Zero. Zip. There’s no need to extend its unbroken track record of failure right into my doctor’s office. Time to get yourself pumped up and ready – and to give me something to talk about that tangentially relates to pop culture.

*****

Here are six great tunes to get you in the frame of mind to do your job as an American citizen – to make yourself heard:

1. Get a Job by The Silhouettes. Obeying this concise directive would go a huge distance in solving the problem of the uninsured.

2. The Ballad of the Green Berets by Staff Sergeant Barry Sadler. This, the most literal song of all time, is a potent reminder that the right to speak out we are exercising didn’t come free and didn’t come cheap. Don’t waste your rights – dissent is almost as patriotic as fighting your country’s enemies or backing up those that do.

3. Fight the Power by Public Enemy. Embrace the chorus and ignore the rest of the lyrics, along with the silly Malcolm X imagery. Catchy, motivating and who can resist old school Flavor Flav!

4. The Theme to the Magnificent Seven by Elmer Bernstein. The ultimate psyche-up music for Americans fighting against all odds. But as the Seven showed, when we’re united we’re invincible – and we’re not about to let ourselves be vinced by a bunch of collectivist doofuses, lefty hacks and their union thugs.

5. God Bless The U.S.A. by Lee Greenwood. The best thing about this song is the way its raw sentimentality and naked patriotism tends to make liberals so uncomfortable. That’s the spirit animating this campaign to preserve our country as we know it, and a little faith in our country’s principles is nothing to be ashamed of. I just wish it had some snarling guitars.

6. I Fought the Law by the Clash. Okay, here’re the snarling guitars. And yeah, I know the Clash thought they were leftists. I don’t care. Anyway, here’s my tortured reasoning as to why this song is relevant here: The law is our Constitution and the First Amendment, the liberals are fighting it, and we’re going to win. Okay, it’s just a really great song that I use to get me amped up for court.

So, ignore the people telling you to sit down and shut up, get pumped, move out and make your voice heard. And I’d sure appreciate it if someone out there could let me know where I can pick up my check from the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.