Many powerful developments have occurred as a result of the patriot uprising of the past year. Though this movement has its imperfections, it is serving to be a powerful force for conservatism and constitutional reform for our wayward Republic. One of these ongoing developments, which was fully expected, is becoming increasingly apparent: Many elected officials, candidates, and party loyalists are not sure whose side they are on. It is amazing how difficult this is for some to figure out.
We would certainly expect the more liberal wing of the media to have a hard time recognizing or comprehending the phenomenon sometimes referred to as the Tea Party movement. They seldom, if ever, take conservatives seriously. Nor are we surprised when avowed and committed liberal politicians write us off as a fringe, extremist, angry mob. However the most intriguing groups to follow are those who wish to be known as conservatives or march under the Republican Party banner. It is clear that a significant portion of these, though definitely not all, is either unwilling or unable to understand the objectives of this surge of patriotic activism.
Whose side are we on? I cannot speak for all of my comrades, but I think I have a good idea what matters to the majority of them. We are not on the side of any political party. This is the hardest thing for many onlookers to understand, especially those who view from a distance. If Republican candidates think that they will automatically get the support of patriotic activists, they are in for a surprise. We are passionate about seeing our Republic returned to the constitutional principles that made us the greatest nation in the world. We are for balancing budgets and smaller government. We are on the side of seeing our states regain the place of prominence provided for in the Constitution. We are on the side of transparency and true representation from elected officials. We are not interested in supporting any candidate of any party that distances themselves from the grassroots patriotism that continues to grow in this country. It is quite revealing that some who want to benefit from the patriotic uprising, and claim to be sympathetic to the movement, are seldom seen attending or supporting its events, and are often ambivalent when it comes to embracing our principles.
Whose side are they on? One of the things that has fueled the unrest of conservative Americans is politicians who speak out of both sides of their mouth. I cannot help but think of a somewhat familiar Bible story where an Old Testament prophet confronted the compromise of those who were aligned with the wicked king Ahab. The prophet’s question was, “How long halt ye between two opinions?” They could not decide whose side they were on. That describes what we see in far too many politicians. They want the support of the patriotic movement but they show no allegiance to the principles and values of that group. How did the compromisers answer the prophet’s inquiry in the aforementioned Bible story? The Scripture records, “And the people answered him not a word.” The fence-straddlers said nothing. They would not commit themselves because they had no true convictions about right and wrong. Patriotic citizens are weary of being disappointed by elected officials who are more interested in winning elections and building support bases among their peers than demonstrating a genuine interest in their constituents and a determination to uphold the Constitution they are sworn to support and defend. They need to decide whose side they are on.
We hope that one of the benefits of this patriotic momentum will be this, that it will become clearer for the concerned citizen to discern whose side their elected officials and candidates are really on. Is their allegiance more to a political party or the fundamental principles of liberty and self government?
Here’s the side(s) I’m on:
1. Equal Justice for All (I saw that written somewhere) which includes rich and poor, gay and straight, man and woman, all races, renters and homeowners (why the mortgage interest deduction?, and more segments than I can remember just now
2. The individual over any organization, be it a union, a corporation, The Sierra Club, The Tea Party, even SPEBSQSA (know who they are?) Only individuals should contribute to campaigns; organizational contributions conceal identities.
3. Voluntary, not forced transfer of wealth (what’s the difference between theft and tax-and-spend?)
4. States Rights (a phrase dishonored by those who used it in contravention of item 1, above, but still exactly what the Constitution says)
5. Taxing consumption but not the earnings of either labor or investment
6. Recognizing that Jefferson meant all were equal in God’s eyes, but at the same time all are unique, and that not even equality of opportunity is guaranteed; in fact, our freedom to provide for our children means opportunity will not be equal, but I do believe that government should have no role in supressing that providing act (no estate tax)
7. That government, in its own interest, should exempt from taxation those things which contribute to productivity, and chief among them are health care, education and investment. A growth in productivity means a bigger tax base for essential services.
8. As above, all government economic polcy should be about creating, not distributing wealth.
Pastor Tom,
I like your reference to the the prophet’s question: “How long halt ye between two opinions?”
Today, we only have to wait for election day to find out the answer.
Most times, I don’t know how to the question “whose side to you fall on” because of the lack of viable choices at the voting booth.
I use the term “viable” because there’s a reality that someone will win, and the winner will make life and death choices for our society for today and tomorrow.
But then, maybe it’s wrong for me to see election day as the day we find out where people stand. Maybe we decide where we stand daily and within all big AND little decisions we make.
Do we want to be a free people? Or do we like the comforts of government regulation and programs so much that we that we don’t mind the chains? Or maybe we don’t feel them at all?
Whose side are we on? It’s a daily decision.
-Ruth
I am on the side of
1. upholding the Constitution.
2. ending unnecessary wars
3. shutting down the federal reserve
4. restoring honest money in the form of precious metals
5. federal power being rolled back to constitutional limits
6. states rights
7. eliminating income tax
8. disbanding the EPA, DEA, FBI, CIA, and BATFE
9. Private Property Rights
10. Securing the rights of unborn children
11. Parental Rights
12. Marijuana Decriminalization for Adult consumption
13. real open transparent government
14. Mandatory term limits
15. repeal of corporate personhood
16. trade tariffs to protect US markets
17. NO MORE FREE TRADE!
18. NO MORE FOREIGN AID!
19. Securing the borders
20. getting out of the UN, WTO, and NATO
Amending the Constitution to
1. require treaties to be ratified by the House as well as the Senate
2. have automatic sunsets of all federal laws after 10 years
3. require a balanced budget
4. require a declaration of war by the congress, before the president can mobilize the military beyond US borders and waters
5. add posse comatatus as an amendment
6. require sponsors of Congressional bills to read their legislation before the Congress verbatim in one sitting before it can be considered in committee.
7. Require Congressmen and Senators to be physically in the chamber during bill readings (sickness and family emergencies withstanding) or lose their seat.
8. have a federal recall process for the people to remove any appointed judge, cabinet member, Senator, representative and president
Yeah, it’s a big list, but I love liberty, and the only way I see to secure it is to tie the hands of the government.
Some folks may not like my position on marijuana, but I ask them to look at alcohol prohibition and apply the same lessons. Let the states regulate it as they see fit, like alcohol.
The most important safeguards have to be codified in the Constitution itself. Too many folks in past years complained about the government being deadlocked, they failed to realize that deadlock was the safe guard, we see now what happens when Congress moves too fast.
Good luck to you! You don’t need to pick a side… just pick the right candidate. If you want to pick on a local issue… check into your county assessors office and the Tax Commission problems. As you probably know… Franklin County has it’s share of unfair real estate assessments. The local level is the only place that will be fixed… just check out the decisions made by the Missouri State Tax Commission against Franklin County residents. It’s a statewide problem but with 66% of the taxes going to the school system… don’t expect a politician to buck the system without some local incentives…