The great American patriot Sir Patrick Henry once averred, “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!

Incidentally, the motto or theme of the great state of New Hampshire is “Live Free or Die!

The words by Patrick Henry and the official motto of New Hampshire both reflect a sober reality: A Free people must always fight to remain free.

It is interesting to note that today the First Amendment to the United States constitution is under assault as never before.

The great Theologian and Sociologist Dr. Peter Berger once wrote that in his estimation the First Amendment which recognizes that Americans have the rights or freedoms of (1.) Religious Expression; (2.) Freedom of Speech; (3.) Freedom of the Press; and (4.) Freedom of Peaceable Assembly is the most important of all of our constitutional amendments. 

Why?

Because the four aforementioned freedoms are some of the chief weapons of making sure that Government at all levels – Federal, State, and Local does not absorb all of the life of its citizenry under a coercive umbrella.

I use the term “coercive umbrella” because to quote both Washington and Jefferson Governmental power implies both force and coercion and Government power is a beast.

Americans have no problem submitting to governmental authority as long it appears to be fair and impartial.

However, in recent times, many Americans feel that the game is rigged or stacked against them.

Here are a few examples:

  • An IRS that specifically targets conservative leaning groups.
  • A highly politicized Justice Department which reminds many Americans of what took place when Richard Nixon was President and when John Mitchell was the Attorney General.

President Nixon was known to have an “enemies list”; one wonders if President Obama is similarly disposed.

  • An administration which seems to recognize terrorism and tyranny against every group except for “Orthodox Christians.”
  • Orthodox Christians wonder both silently and at times aloud why there is no Administration outrage against both the slaughter and murder of Christians in Egypt and in Kenya.

President Obama’s administration referred to the killing of more than 20 Coptic Egyptian Christians as “murdered citizens” (a politically correct and incorrect term).

These examples are bad in themselves, but to top things off, Orthodox Christians along with their friends who embrace a worldview based on our “Judeo-Christian heritage” find that their political leaders no longer feel that the “Freedom of Religion” is worth defending.

In 1993, President Bill Clinton signed into law a bill known as The Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (commonly abbreviated as RFRA).

The (RFRA) law passed both houses of Congress with overwhelming bi-partisan support.

As a matter of fact, none other than United States Senator Chuck Schumer – Mr. Liberal and perhaps the next Democratic Minority Leader of the Senate – co-sponsored this bill.

Years later the Supreme Court noted in one of their rulings that the federal (RFRA) law could not be universally applied to the individual 50 states.

Over the last 20 years, no less than 21 states have passed their own versions of the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA).

However, the states of Indiana and Arkansas found their respective (RFRA) laws under fierce attack by a certain segment of the militant Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual and Transgender (LGBT) community that stated that the two (RFRA) laws in Indiana and Arkansas could have the effect of discriminating against the rights of Gays and Lesbians.

At this present moment, there is no organized Conspiracy in this nation against the (LGBT) community to deny them of their civil rights in any way similar or comparable to the campaign that took place from 1619 to 1865 to deny Native-American Indians and Black Americans their rights and liberties.

(The controversial writer Dr. Cornell West states in his book “Race Matters” that Black Americans did not receive full citizenship until the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Women did not receive full enfranchisement until 1920 with the passage of the 19th Amendment.

No one is calling someone who happens to be Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual or Transgender “three-fifths of a person.”)

Most mainstream American Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox Christians and Conservative Jews – along with their faithful Islamic friends seek no harm nor do they seek to deny basic civil rights and liberties to their (LGBT) friends and neighbors.

Much of the scurrilous criticism of (RFRA) laws is nothing more than a “red herring.”

Unfortunately, some militant Gay and Lesbian groups have gone from their original goals of inclusion and equality within the American mainstream to now attempting to force “All Americans” to embrace a complete redefinition of the traditional American two-parent family of a male father and a female mother.

The key and existential question of the moment is this: Will the majority of Americans who believe in traditional moral values idly sit back and allow their freedoms and liberties to be sabotaged?

President John Adams stated that “We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.

Ever since 1957 and 1962 the Supreme Court – along with the inferior Federal Appellate and District courts has been “experimenting and redefining our religious liberties” in an effort to cleanse and purge the public sphere of any discourse revolving around our Judeo-Christian heritage.

The question must be asked once more: “How long will people of religious faith and good will sit back and allow their liberties to be experimented with?”

Finally, it might be worth mentioning the full context of Sir Patrick Henry’s “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” quote.

Mr. Henry stated in full that “”Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!  I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Those are sober words for a time that demands both clear thinking and decisive action.

 

Evan Sayet points out that

The Modern Liberal will invariably side with evil over good, wrong over right, and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success.

Sayet has summarized in 25 words why Liberals love the Cuban Communist dictatorship. The latest manifestation of that love has been to invite Raul Castro and his thugs to the VII Summit of the Americas, a.k.a. the circus.

What could possibly go wrong? Watch this video and see:
Cuban dissidents, their American supporters brutally attacked in Panama.

Capitol Hill Cubans:

A half-dozen Cuban dissident leaders and American citizens were attacked this afternoon by a group of Castro regime agents in Panama City.

The activists were placing flowers at the statue of Cuban independence hero, Jose Marti, when approached by a group of Castro regime agents, who began to violently beat them.

Among those attacked were a group of American citizens, including Orlando Gutierrez of the Democratic Directorate, Silvia Iriondo of Mothers Against Repression and Gus Monge.

The Cuban dissidents include former political prisoner Jorge Luis Garcia Perez “Antunez,” his wife Yris Perez Aguilera and Leticia Ramos Herreria of The Ladies in White.

The Panamanian police watched as the attack took place.  Then, it detained the Cuban dissident leaders and American citizens. Meanwhile, the Castro regime agents were allowed to walk.

As it turns out, one of the attackers has been identified as the head of Cuban intelligence in Venezuela, Col. Alexis Frutos Weeden.

In another incident, Cuban operatives staged an “act of repudiation” on dissidents and U.S. citizens:

About 100 supporters of Cuba’s government aggressively heckled dissidents from the communist-run island attending a civil society forum Wednesday at the start of the Summit of the Americas in Panama.

Opponents of President Raul Castro were greeted to shouts of “imperialist” and “mercenaries” as they filed into a hotel auditorium to attend speeches by summit host Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela and former U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The Communist regime regularly conducts these “acts of repudiation” to intimidate its citizenry into submitting to the dictatorship.

U.S. President Barack Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro will share the same stage today. Don’t expect Obama to mention Wednesday’s incidents.

Pres. Obama, upon announcing easing restrictions on Cuba, declared that by Charting a New Course on Cuba (emphasis added),

Our travel and remittance policies are helping Cubans by providing alternative sources of information and opportunities for self-employment and private property ownership, and by strengthening independent civil society.

The Cuban dictatorship, which announced that it was not going to change immediately following the White House declaration, is making sure we all see that it’s “Not Ready For Prime Time Civil Society.”

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s blog.

This is via this piece by Erick Erickson at Townhall

“Evil talks about tolerance only when it’s weak. When it gains the upper hand, its vanity always requires the destruction of the good and the innocent, because the example of good and innocent lives is an ongoing witness against it. So it always has been. So it always will be. And America has no special immunity to becoming an enemy of its own founding beliefs about human freedom, human dignity, the limited power of the state and the sovereignty of God.”

Archbishop Chaput 2012

Explains a lot of what we’ve seen lately, doesn’t it?

I never Knew the New Republic did comedy because this argument by Brian Beutler is a joke.

Rand Paul’s Petulance With Reporters Will Ruin Him

Now in fairness to Mr. Beutler, you can make a case that Mr. Paul has been more flexible in his positions and to some degree his article makes that case

Paul went on to suggest his old view—that we should not provide foreign aid to Israel—isn’t in contradiction with his new view: that foreign aid should be phased out, starting with antagonistic countries and working back to Israel, because “ultimately all nations should be free of foreign aid because we shouldn’t borrow money to do it.”

However attacking the Senator for the difference between his ideal (the elimination of foreign aid) and the steps that are politically possible to move in that direction (elimination of foreign aid to our enemies) is a weak argument as selling what is currently possible while making the case to the people for the next step is the way an intelligent pol creates change.

But in terms of sheer nonsense that pales before the argument that not being friendly to reporters is going to ruin him.

When he shushes a reporter or scolds her for talking over him, his loyalists don’t see an otherwise talented politician unable to hide his annoyance. They eat it up. In their minds Paul is the rare politician who’ll bite back at reporters when they supposedly expose their biases. But asking questions that other conservatives continue to raise reveals no bias. What it reveals is that, for all his natural talent, Paul can’t reconcile his beliefs with his ambitions. That’s a huge problem for a national politician. It will define his candidacy.

This is nonsense for two significant reasons.

The first is the most obvious, no matter how many times as a Republican you go along with a reporters meme or make concessions to their opinions, the reality is the goal of the Mainstream media is your defeat and if you are a strong conservative not just your defeat you but discredit you.

Making accommodations with people who want to destroy you is analogous to the Iran deal a denial of reality that will in the end only make things worse.

That argument alone justifies Senator Paul statements but there is a second less obvious point that is even more decisive.  The media as an institution is not trusted by the public as Gallup noted during while discussing the Brian Williams fiasco:

Will this affect Americans’ trust in the media? It could, but it’s important to keep in mind that such trust is already as low as it has been since Gallup began measuring it.

Each September we track a measure of trust in “…the mass media, such as newspapers, TV and radio — when it comes to reporting the news fully, accurately and fairly…” The accompanying graph shows the trend since 1997, with the “great deal”/”fair amount” of trust category dropping from as high as 55% in 1999 to a low of 40% both in 2012 and in 2014.

In other words six in ten Americans don’t trust the MSM in fact according to Gallup’s chart less than one in five Americans trust Television or Internet news quite a lot or more and Newspapers only manage to produce that level of trust from 22% of Americans.

In fact not only are media trusted less than Banks but only 38% of independents and 54% of Democrats have even a fair amount of trust of the media.

That being the case when Rand Paul expresses public distrust in the media the most likely reaction from the majority of the voting public is going to be agreement

Will it be enough to win Senator Paul the nomination?  Of course not, but disdain for the media can only help Rand Paul with voters and only someone from the media could fail to understand this.

***************************************************************************

If 1000 of our readers kicked in $20 we’d be all set for a full year and I could retire DaTipJar till January of 2016.

Of course if one person wants to kick in that $20K we’ll take that too.  Help me make the good fight every single day.

We’re extending our March premium to April for tip jar hitters of $50 or more is Stacy McCain’s book:  Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature

Subscribe at $50 or more in April and receive each monthly premium shipped the date of your payment.

 

All Tip Jar hits in April of $10 or more will get a copy of Jeff Trapani’s excellent E-Book Victor the Monster Frankenstein.