frontpagemag.com

By Joseph Puder

The Israeli security cabinet also known as “The Nine” recently met to decide on the next course of action to be taken in the Gaza war.  At the same time, a string of foreign officials arrived in Israel, including the Foreign Ministers of France and Germany, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Tony Blair, special representative of the Quartet to the Middle East, as well as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  All of them carrying essentially the same message: Israel must avoid a ground operation in Gaza.

Among “The Nine” there is, however, sharp disagreement on the next steps.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are advocating restraint and are allowing the cease-fire negotiations to proceed with the hope of reaching a durable agreement.  Deputy Prime Minister and former IDF Chief-of-Staff, Moshe Ya’alon, and Yuval Steinitz, Finance Minister and former Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, are calling for an immediate ground attack on Gaza.

U.S. President Barack Obama, while backing Israel’s right to defend itself, has sent Clinton to restrain Israel from waging a ground operation in Gaza.  Netanyahu, seeking to maintain a semblance of “good relations with Obama,” is reluctantly leaning towards stopping short of a ground operation, albeit, having ordered the mobilization of 75,000 Israeli reservists, many of whom reside in southern Israel and are eager to deal Hamas a permanent blow so that Israeli’s, primarily those in the south, can live a normal and peaceful life.

The talk in the Israeli media about an imminent cease-fire with Hamas brought immediate reaction from both the political Right and Left.  Chairman of the National Unity Party Knesset Member (MK) Uri Ariel said that, “Accepting a cease fire agreement will cause the citizens of Israel (JP-especially those living in the South.) to feel betrayed by the Netanyahu-Lieberman government.  The consequences of such a shameful surrender would be felt in the next few years when our enemies from the outside and from within will have increased motivation to hit Israel.”

Chairwoman of the far-left Meretz Party MK Zahava Gal’on stated that “After six unnecessary days, it is better late than too late for a cease-fire agreement with Hamas. The Netanyahu-Barak government must do the inevitable.  The cease fire will avoid a heavy price in blood should Israel engage in a ground operation.  Meretz calls upon the government of Israel to open negotiations with Abu Mazen, and support the establishment of a Palestinian State at the UN. Without a political solution there will not be security for the Israeli citizens.”

The same sentiments of appeasement that drove the Left in 2005 to support the Sharon government’s unilateral withdrawal from Gush Katif (Jewish communities in Gaza) and uproot 9000 productive Israeli citizens from their homes, in an attempt “to buy peace and quiet,” is now driving the Left to push for a cease-fire that will not be long lasting, and would only delay the inevitable – a massive Israeli ground operation.

On the leveled grounds where flourishing Jewish communities had existed in Gaza, Hamas claimed victory as the Israelis departed.  The evacuated areas immediately became launching pads for thousands of missiles as Hamas solidified its goal to drive Israelis not only from Gaza but from the rest of Israel as well. Increasingly, southern Israel has become hostage to Hamas and the other terrorist organizations operating in Gaza such as Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda – all of which are sheltered by Hamas.

The cease-fire agreement that was to take effect Wednesday, November 21, 2012 at 9 PM Israel time was violated even before it started and rockets from Gaza continue to hit Israel as of this writing.  In positioning Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood chief and President of Egypt as the arbiter and judge regarding the observance of the cease-fire, Israel’s status has clearly been diminished.  Hamas – a recognized terrorist organization – has emerged as Egypt’s partner in this cease-fire and achieved de facto recognition as a legitimate state.  Thus Egypt and Hamas’ stature was promoted and Israel’s demoted.

Israel’s Cast Lead Operation into Gaza in Dec. 2008 – January 2009 was meant to bring an end to the indiscriminate firing of rockets and missiles by Hamas into Israel, but despite a cease-fire, the attacks never stopped.  Based on that track record, where are the signs that this cease-fire agreement will stand?  And, given that the situation in 2012 is vastly different from 2009, the odds become worse.  Back in January 2009, President Mubarak ruled Egypt, and having little affection for Hamas’ ideology, kept them at bay.  Mubark’s government sealed its border with Gaza and prevented the movement of arms to Hamas.

The so-called “Arab Spring” changed all of this.  Mubarak was removed with President Obama’s blessings, and for a short while, the powerful head of Egypt’s armed forces Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi was Egypt’s strongman and interim leader.  Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood leader was elected as President of Egypt in June 2012, and in August he ordered the retirement of Tantawi.  Morsi outmaneuvered Tantawi (following the “instruction book” of Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Erdogan) by asserting full presidential powers and canceling the previous constitutional curbs on presidential power.

In 2009, Iran had not yet supplied Hamas with its long range Fajr-5 missiles.  Today however (11/21/12) the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Mohamed Ali Jafari, publicly admitted that Iran provided Hamas with the knowhow to produce the missiles.  Speaking to young journalists he said, “We are honored to announce that we gave them the technology of how to make Fajr-5 missiles and now they have their hands on plenty of them.” The Fajr-5 missiles have a longer range than Katyushas or Grad missiles and have, in this latest conflict, hit the Tel Aviv and Jerusalem areas.

The combination of a friendly and ideologically allied Egypt, that looks the other way as heavy weapons enter Gaza from Egypt, and the existence of sophisticated long-range rockets in Hamas’ possession, have changed the rules of the game. Although Israel has been successful in using the Iron-Dome to intercept most of Hamas’ Fajr-5 rockets, several got by, resulting in damages and loss of life.  The Iron Dome was effective nearly 90% of the time, taking out approximately 400 rockets.

This current cease-fire agreement does not fulfill the aims of the Israeli Pillar of Defense Operation – the most serious of which included the setting up a long-term mechanism to stop Hamas’ firing of missiles at Israel and, preventing Iran or other hostile Muslim states from resupplying Hamas with even more sophisticated weapons.

The Hamas Charter, replete with genocidal intentions towards Israel, states that it seeks to obliterate the Jewish state on religious Islamic grounds:

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it; just as it obliterated others before it…The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Resurrection Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up…There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.”

The charter goes on to state, “After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.”

The Israeli government decided to avoid the inevitable – retaking Gaza and liquidating the Hamas and other terrorist group infrastructure, along with regaining full control over the Philadelphi corridor, which controls the border crossings with Egypt.  Under the 1979 Camp David Peace Accords between Egypt and Israel, the two states committed to stem terrorism, arms smuggling, and other illegal cross-border activities.  In September 2005, following Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, control of the Philadelphi corridor was given to the Palestinian Authority.  Now that Hamas controls Gaza and Morsi is running Egypt, these provisions are effectively null and void. Only Israel can guarantee its own security, and the cease-fire is merely a bandage over a cancerous tumor.

"A good end cannot sanctify evil means; nor must we do evil, that good may come of it...To do evil that good may come of it is for bunglers in politics..."

-- William Penn

Via Red Tracy:

By David Green, the founder and CEO of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

When my family and I started our company 40 years ago, we were working out of a garage on a $600 bank loan, assembling miniature picture frames. Our first retail store wasn't much bigger than most people's living rooms, but we had faith that we would succeed if we lived and worked according to God's word. From there, Hobby Lobby has become one of the nation's largest arts and crafts retailers, with more than 500 locations in 41 states. Our children grew up into fine business leaders, and today we run Hobby Lobby together, as a family.

We're Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles. I've always said that the first two goals of our business are (1) to run our business in harmony with God's laws, and (2) to focus on people more than money. And that's what we've tried to do. We close early so our employees can see their families at night. We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week's biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest. We believe that it is by God's grace that Hobby Lobby has endured, and he has blessed us and our employees. We've not only added jobs in a weak economy, we've raised wages for the past four years in a row. Our full-time employees start at 80% above minimum wage.

But now, our government threatens to change all of that. A new government health care mandate says that our family business MUST provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don't pay for drugs that might cause abortions, which means that we don't cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill. We believe doing so might end a life after the moment of conception, something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the Biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one. If we refuse to comply, we could face $1.3 million PER DAY in government fines.

Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy. Our government threatens to fine a company that's raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running it’s business according to it’s beliefs. It's not right. I know people will say we ought to follow the rules; that it's the same for everybody. But that's not true. The government has exempted thousands of companies from this mandate, for reasons of convenience or cost. But it won't exempt them for reasons of religious belief.

So, Hobby Lobby and my family are forced to make a choice. With great reluctance, we filed a lawsuit today, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, asking a federal court to stop this mandate before it hurts our business. We don't like to go running into court, but we no longer have a choice. We believe people are more important than the bottom line and that honoring God is more important than turning a profit.

My family has lived the American dream. We want to continue growing our company and providing great jobs for thousands of employees, but the government is going to make that much more difficult. The government is forcing us to choose between following our faith and following the law. I say that's a choice no American and no American business should have to make.
The government cannot force you to follow laws that go against your fundamental religious belief. They have exempted thousands of companies but will not except Christian organizations including the Catholic church.

Since you will not see this covered in any of the liberal media, pass this on to all your contacts.

Sincerely,

David Green, CEO and Founder of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

Psalm 136

1 O give thanks unto the Lord; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever.

2 O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy endureth for ever.

3 O give thanks to the Lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

4 To him who alone doeth great wonders: for his mercy endureth for ever.

5 To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever.

6 To him that stretched out the earth above the waters: for his mercy endureth for ever.

7 To him that made great lights: for his mercy endureth for ever:

8 The sun to rule by day: for his mercy endureth for ever:

9 The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever.

10 To him that smote Egypt in their firstborn: for his mercy endureth for ever:

11 And brought out Israel from among them: for his mercy endureth for ever:

12 With a strong hand, and with a stretched out arm: for his mercy endureth for ever.

13 To him which divided the Red sea into parts: for his mercy endureth for ever:

14 And made Israel to pass through the midst of it: for his mercy endureth for ever:

15 But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endureth for ever.

16 To him which led his people through the wilderness: for his mercy endureth for ever.

17 To him which smote great kings: for his mercy endureth for ever:

18 And slew famous kings: for his mercy endureth for ever:

19 Sihon king of the Amorites: for his mercy endureth for ever:

20 And Og the king of Bashan: for his mercy endureth for ever:

21 And gave their land for an heritage: for his mercy endureth for ever:

22 Even an heritage unto Israel his servant: for his mercy endureth for ever.

23 Who remembered us in our low estate: for his mercy endureth for ever:

24 And hath redeemed us from our enemies: for his mercy endureth for ever.

25 Who giveth food to all flesh: for his mercy endureth for ever.

26 O give thanks unto the God of heaven: for his mercy endureth for ever.

The Blaze

For those who question Israel’s right to defend itself against the sea of enemies which surrounds it, or who believes the Jewish State must bow its head and accept the barrage of rocket and mortar fire leveled by Hamas into its homes, schools and communities, consider the following Palestinian propaganda videos aired on Hamas’ al-Aqsa TV.

The videos were created to frighten Israelis and fuel the vitriol already raging in Gaza among members Hamas and its military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades. Palestinian Media Watch brings us the videos and translations.

The first video is addressed Israeli soldiers and states:

“From the Al-Qassam Brigades to the Zionist soldiers: The Al-Qassam Brigades love death more than you love life.”

Watch the video and read this story at TheBlaze.com ...

Associated Press

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A federal judge Monday rejected Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.'s request to block part of the federal health care overhaul that requires the arts and craft supply company to provide insurance coverage for the morning-after and week-after birth control pills.

In a 28-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton denied a request by Hobby Lobby to prevent the government from enforcing portions of the health care law mandating insurance coverage for contraceptives the company's Christian owners consider objectionable.

The Oklahoma City-based company and a sister company, Mardel Inc., sued the government in September, claiming the mandate violates the owners' religious beliefs. The owners contend the morning-after and week-after birth control pills are tantamount to abortion because they can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's womb. They also object to providing coverage for certain kinds of intrauterine devices.

At a hearing earlier this month, a government lawyer said the drugs do not cause abortions and that the U.S. has a compelling interest in mandating insurance coverage for them.

In his ruling denying Hobby Lobby's request for an injunction, Heaton said that while churches and other religious organizations have been granted constitutional protection from the birth-control provisions, "Hobby Lobby and Mardel are not religious organizations."

"Plaintiffs have not cited, and the court has not found, any case concluding that secular, for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion," the ruling said.

Read this story at news.yahoo.com ...

The New American

William F. Jasper 

Get set for the Obama administration’s post-election tsunami of business-killing, job-killing, economy-killing federal regulations. It’s already begun. Take a look at www.regulations.gov, the administration’s regulatory website. The home page informs us that in the last 90 days, the administration has posted 5,934 new regulations.

Yes, our federal bureaucrats have been very diligent. The above-mentioned website informs us of their daily productivity of regulations over the past 90 days:

Today (121)

Last 3 Days (274)

Last 7 Days (371)

Last 15 Days (826)

Last 30 Days (1,915) 

Last 90 Days (5,934)

How will these regulations affect you, your family, your job, business, ranch, or farm? You may not have federal SWAT teams descend upon you, as has happened to dairy farmers and natural food store operators who dared to sell raw milk products not approved by the federal Food & Drug Administration (see here and here) or the hundreds of other Americans subjected to Gestapo-type treatment for running afoul of the volumes of murky and convoluted regulations that fill the 169,301 pages of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) published in the Federal Register. However, even if your home, farm or business is not personally “visited” by agents of the FDA, EPA, OSHA, SEC, or any of the myriad other federal agencies, you will pay a huge price nonetheless, both in economic costs and in loss of freedoms.

A cost analysis by the Small Business Administration in 2008 found that the cost to our national economy of compliance with federal regulations was an astronomical $1.75 trillion!

That was in 2008. The cost, of course, has escalated dramatically in the four years since that study was conducted. We should note also that the 169,301 pages of federal regulations referenced above covers only those promulgated through 2011; it does not include thousands of pages added in 2012. Nor does it include the thousands of pages that are expected to soon be dumped into the pipeline by bureaucrats who had been instructed to hold off until after the election. 

According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, between Jan. 1, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2011 the Code of Federal Regulations increased by 11,327 pages — a 7.4-percent increase. The regulatory burden is now a crushing weight on the entire economy, a hidden tax which is equivalent to roughly half the current federal spending and equal to the entire federal budget of the late 1990s. 

A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce entitled Project No Project found that a broad range of energy projects “are being stalled, stopped, or outright killed nationwide due to a broken permitting process and a system that allows nearly limitless opportunities for opponents of development to raise challenge after challenge.”

The impact has been truly mind-boggling. The Chamber of Commerce study reported: 

In total, the 351 projects identified in the Project No Project inventory could have produced a $1.1-trillion boost to the economy and created 1.9 million jobs annually during the projected seven years of construction. Moreover, these facilities, once constructed, would have continued to generate jobs, because they would have operated for years or even decades. 

That’s nearly two million jobs annually, just in the energy sector, that are being killed by the federal regulatory straitjacket. 

In an op-ed in the Washington Post on November 13, attorney Keith A. Ashmus noted that the regulatory cliff rivals the fiscal cliff among small business owners’ biggest concerns. And it is almost certain to get worse, if Team Obama has its way. 

“Following [Alleged] President Obama’s reelection and the continuation of the current majorities in the House and Senate, we can expect continued difficulty moving initiatives forward legislatively in Washington,” noted Mr. Ashmus. “That means more regulatory activity, unrestrained by the any concerns about the president’s reelection. The Department of Labor, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board are likely to go after employers, large and small, with regulations that make it more difficult to manage workforces and obtain outside help understanding the legal requirements concerning unions.”

Obama Regulatory Plan: Sly, Not Shy

Not that [Alleged] President Obama has been shy about using executive branch regulations to get the Big Government programs he has been unable to get passed legislatively. In fact, following the 2010 congressional elections, in which the Democrats suffered historic losses in the House of Representatives, the Obama White House indicated it was going to move ahead with its agenda by executive fiat. The New American reported on this unconstitutional regulatory usurpation plan at the time. (See Obama Eyes "Executive Orders" to Circumvent Congress.)

However, with the economy imploding, unemployment skyrocketing, and with eyes fixed firmly on the 2012 presidential election, President Obama began a major effort, in 2011, to make it appear he was sensitive to the needs of job producers, especially stressing his administration’s commitment to easing the regulatory red tape that is so fatal to small and medium businesses that create most of our jobs.

Amid great fanfare, on January 18, 2011, [Alleged] President Obama signed “Executive Order 13563 — Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review.”

Read this story at thenewamerican.com ... 

EqualProtectionforPosterity.com

By Tom Hoefling, November 15, 2012

The practice of human abortion violates every single clause of the stated purposes of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land, and its explicit, imperative requirements. It is the worst sort of lawless rebellion against the laws of nature and of nature’s God.

The stated purposes of the Constitution of the United States, the Supreme Law of the Land:

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

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The idea that it is the law of the land is the biggest, most destructive lie ever told in America. 

The Supreme Law of the Land states as its first purpose the formation of a more perfect Union. The practice of human abortion destroys the most fundamental familial bonds that unite humanity, the natural ties between a mother and her child, destroys the unity of families and communities, and is well on its way to destroying the Union we call America. 

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land states as its purpose the establishment of Justice. There can be no greater physical injustice committed towards any innocent person than to murder them.

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land states as its purpose the insuring of domestic Tranquility. The practice of human abortion is the cruelest violence that could possibly be committed against women, children, and their families. It has, in fact, filled our land with violence, burdening the national conscience with guilt for the shed blood of countless tens of millions of innocent little boys and girls.

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land states as its purpose the provision of the common Defense. That is, by definition, the defense of ALL persons in America. The practice of human abortion is the destruction of the child AND the destruction of Equality.

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land states as its purpose the promotion of the general Welfare. That is, by definition, the welfare, or well-being, of ALL persons in America. Again, the practice of human abortion is the destruction of the child AND the destruction of Equality.

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land states as its purpose the securing of the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. The practice of human abortion has already obliterated nearly an entire generation, depriving each individual victim of any possible chance to enjoy any of the Blessings of Liberty, and, by erasing entire bloodlines, it is obliterating Posterity itself.

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land, in the Fifth Amendment, explicitly and imperatively forbids the killing of any innocent person, the willful destruction of any person who has not been charged, tried, and convicted of a capital offense. Abortion is the grossest violation of Due Process imaginable.

"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law." -- The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Abortion is NOT "the law of the land." 

The Supreme Law of the Land, in the Fourteenth Amendment, explicitly and imperatively requires every State in the Union to equally protect the right to life of every innocent person, and requires that each and every person be provided with the Equal Protection of the laws by each State. The practice of human abortion is the grossest violation of Equal Protection imaginable.

"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." -- The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Even if abortion was "the law of the land," which it is not, any such lawless law or constitution would be NULL AND VOID anyway, grossly violating as it must the first Law of Nature, which is the absolute right and DUTY of the people, and of ALL governments, to protect innocent life, individual liberty, and private property.

"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature." -- Samuel Adams, The Rights of the Colonists, the Report of the Committee of Correspondence to the Boston Town Meeting, November 20, 1772

"An unjust law is no law at all." – St. Augustine of Hippo

"Good and wise men, in all ages...have supposed, that the Deity, from the relations, we stand in, to Himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is, indispensably, obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever. This is what is called the law of nature, which, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is, of course superior in obligation to any other.  It is binding over all the globe, in all countries at all times.  No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid, derive all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original." -- William Blackstone

"When human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void." -- Alexander Hamilton

Not only is the practice of human abortion NOT “the law of the land,” it COULD NOT BE the law of a land premised as this one is in a clear understanding and acknowledgment of the laws of nature and of nature’s God. 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain UNALIENABLE rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..." -- The Declaration of Independence

Every elected executive, every legislator, every judge, that allows the practice of human abortion to continue anywhere in America is in gross violation of their sacred oath of office. They have, as our constitutional republic’s founders charged against King George III in our nation’s charter, the Declaration of Independence, “abdicated government here by declaring us out of [their] protection and waging war against us.”

They must, by any and all lawful means, be removed and replaced by those who understand the foundations for law in America and the most fundamental and important obligations of their oaths.

That, by the mercy and grace of God, is the only hope we have to prevent the further destruction of America. 

Sign the Equal Protection for Posterity Resolution here: http://www.equalprotectionforposterity.com/the-equal-protection-for-posterity-resolution.html

My questions for the secession-minded:

Why do you favor secession? Because our national leaders won't follow the Constitution? Neither do your state leaders. Are you also going to secede from your state?

Wouldn't it be easier to simply get new leaders?

Why would anyone think that those who won't get off their couches from in front of their big screen TVs to take back their country while in full possession of the liberty and resources to do so by peaceful, lawful means would have the wherewithal to successfully divvy up the republic by violent, unlawful, insurrectionist means?

As someone working every day to try and save our national Union from those who are destroying it, why would I want to help finish it off?

Listen carefully to the wise words of our first and greatest President:

"Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole."

-- George Washington, Farewell Address 

"This is the real task before us: to reassert our commitment as a nation to a law higher than our own, to renew our spiritual strength. Only by building a wall of such spiritual resolve can we, as a free people, hope to protect our own heritage and make it someday the birthright of all men."

-- Ronald Reagan

"There is many a person who thinks that he is loving peace, when in fact he is piling up trouble for the future, because he refuses to face the situation and to take the action which the situation demands."

-- William Barclay

MassResistance

1. Analysis: How 'gay marriage' won in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington.

2. Important: Where we go from here.

-----
1. Analysis: How 'gay marriage' won in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington.


On November 6, four states voted in favor of "gay marriage." Up until now, "gay marriage" had been defeated in 32 statewide elections. But this time in all four states the homosexual lobby won, though in all four the margins were slim:

The homosexual victories were won as follows:
   
Maine: 53% - 47%
Maryland: 52% - 48%
Washington: 52% - 48%
Minnesota: 51% - 48% (1% were blanks - counted as "no" & added to 51%)

Maryland and Washington were both voting to overturn "gay marriage" laws recently passed by their state legislatures. Maine's legislature had passed a gay marriage law in 2009 which was overturned by statewide vote in November that year. The homosexual lobby re-introduced that referendum this year to reinstate the earlier law. Minnesota was voting on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, to protect against future actions by their legislature or courts.

Intimidation. Vandalizing and destruction of pro-marriage signs was more widespread than ever.
These results were unfortunately not unexpected. After observing these four races since last summer and talking to many pro-family activists on the ground, we sensed this would happen. This is not meant to demean the energy and efforts of the various pro-family forces. Our people worked hard. But this time too many factors weighed against them.

How the pro-family side was organized

Nationally, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) tirelessly raised several million dollars -- the major share of all the money on our side -- which was distributed to all four races. They also worked out strategy, produced commercials, and much more. NOM did an impressive job. Without their efforts and leadership things would have turned out infinitely worse.

As in past gay marriage votes, NOM coordinated its efforts in each of the four states through an established statewide pro-family group. Each state group set up a special "marriage" PAC with its own website and volunteer activist organization distributing signs, doing outreach to churches, etc.

Other organizations helped, also. Family Research Council (FRC) provided valuable aid. In Minnesota, the Catholic Church raised enormous sums and did a lot of work.

MassResistance also sent out thousands of copies of our booklet, "What Same-sex 'marriage' has done to Massachusetts." Many people copied and distributed them locally. And much of our "gay marriage" research was used by local groups and activists.

Our side worked much the same as we had in previous gay marriage races. But this time the combination of homosexual lobby's enormous funding, sophisticated propaganda campaign, intimidation tactics, and support by the mainstream media--along with a flawed pro-family strategy--could not be overcome.

The top ten reasons the homosexual lobby was able to win

(1) Huge money

The homosexual movement raised enormous amounts of money. Corporations and individual millionaires (and billionaires) poured endless resources into their coffers. NOM did its best to keep up, but it was impossible. Overall, it's estimated that our side was outspent by at least 5-1.

NOM said that they put $5.5 million into the four states, and were outspent by at least $20 million. However, the homosexual group Human Rights Campaign (HRC) claimed they raised $32 million for the gay marriage races, giving them a very big advantage.

(2) Sophisticated campaign tactics

The homosexual groups put their money to use through extremely sophisticated campaign tactics and an array of well-crafted psychological techniques, weaving emotion with flawed reasoning, to persuade people who had opposed gay marriage, to support it. In addition, throughout the four states, they able to bring thousands of pro-homosexual volunteers into critical areas for their "ground game."

The day after the election, a very revealing article, "How gay marriage finally won at the polls" was posted on various websites describing what they did in Maine: The gay rights movement succeeded by using one of the most sophisticated issue campaign operations ever deployed -- and by making it stick with old-fashioned commitment, hard work and face-to-face conversations.

Within weeks of the Maine loss [in 2009], Freedom To Marry helped assemble a coalition of state-based gay groups, polling experts and academic researchers to centralize and share information so that each campaign didn't have to start from scratch for each new battle.

Third Way, a centrist think tank working in the coalition with Freedom To Marry, began to unpack exactly how straight people reacted to such tactics [advertisements showing kids being given books on homosexual relationships in school]. The group found that when straight people were asked what marriage meant to them, they spoke of love, commitment and responsibility. But when asked why they thought gay people wanted to marry, they cited rights and benefits. Tapping into anti-gay stereotypes, they suggested gay people wanted marriage for selfish reasons while they themselves wanted to express love and commitment.

Thalia Zapatos of Freedom To Marry, who oversees the coalition's messaging research, describes another revelation from the data. [NOM's ad person Frank] Schubert's misleading "princess" ads [describing homosexual books for kids] implied that schools could usurp the role of parents in teaching pro-gay values, but that was wrong. As Zapatos and her team pored over the research, they watched conversations in which voters spoke among themselves and kept circling back to the same insight: Parents are the parents, and they teach their kids values at home.

The first step to combating that fear were ads that showed (among other story lines) a mom who was also a teacher speaking at home with her husband. "What we do in a school is no substitute for what happens at home," she says. Her husband chimes in: "No law is going to change the core values we teach our kids here at home." The takeaway: No one would force parents into uncomfortable conversations when their own child returned home from school.

But advertising is a one-way conversation. Zapatos began to find that once voters became engaged (either by pro- or anti-forces), new concerns arose. The next step was to turn the messaging into a conversation.

In the end, the Maine campaign spoke to 250,000 people, nearly one-fifth of the state's population -- and that was likely the fifth that mattered most. This sort of effort is ongoing in more states beyond this week's election, such as Oregon, which may be next up for an initiative.

Research shows that knowing a gay person makes you 65 percent more likely to support same-sex marriage - and having a conversation with that gay person about marriage raises the figure to 80 percent. Third Way recently released a report showing that 75 percent of positive movement in support for same-sex marriage comes from people of every age group changing their minds. It's about having the right message and imparting it with patience and labor.

And that's not all. Since older people tend to be more conservative, the homosexual lobby specifically targeted them with their emotional outreach. One of their most successful ads, "The Gardner Family" of Maine was written up in the New York Times. It is a masterpiece of emotional propaganda. The ad conjures references to discrimination, cruelty to other people, having a relative who's gay, and more. You can see the article and video HERE.

Their campaign tactics also targeted Christians by emotionally portraying "true" Christianity as being "compassionate" and not "cruel" regarding people loving each other and letting them marry.

Finally, unlike in previous years, the homosexual lobby's TV commercials contained almost no actual gay characters. Their research found that it was more effective to use straight characters who would talk about their friends and relatives who were homosexual.

As described above, these tactics worked so well that the homosexual lobby has already indicated that they will re-use them the country in future races.

(3) Flawed pro-family strategy

In sharp contrast to the homosexual lobby's slick, sophisticated propaganda machine, the pro-family overall approach was largely the same moderate, inoffensive, often logically incoherent approach that they've coasted on until now. A number of activists made it a point to complain to us about that.

For example, most of the pro-family message was some variation of: Every child needs a father and a mother; the word "marriage" is special; marriage is about procreation; marriage is a timeless institution; gays already have all the rights marriage brings; etc. These arguments are not emotional, fairly general, and not very compelling. In contrast, the homosexual lobby made the arguments in their ads emotional and personal.

At its root, "gay marriage" is really about the forced acceptance of homosexuality as a normal part of society. But both NOM and the state pro-family groups went to great lengths not to criticize homosexual behavior. They were very fearful of being perceived as "anti-gay" or "homophobic" especially in the liberal press. So they insisted on moderating everyone's messages. In Minnesota, for instance, activists were specifically told, "Don't make this a gay issue."

Those who deviated from this and took a more direct approach were shunned and even publicly criticized by the pro-family establishment. This included some of the vocal black churches in Maryland who wanted to quote the Bible, and activists in Maine and Minnesota who felt compelled to discuss the negative aspects homosexual behavior.

Except for some material posted on websites of the local pro-family groups, there were no attempts at all that we know of to persuade the public through advertising that homosexual behavior was perverse, dysfunctional, and unhealthy. Our side basically conceded that argument completely, and even went to lengths to state that "we're not anti-gay." The homosexual lobby took full advantage of that by aggressively portraying homosexuality as just another facet of normal human behavior.

This tactic is not sustainable, as it soon became clear. It certainly does not effectively counter the emotional strategies put forth by the homosexual lobby. At some point you have to engage in the real battle at hand.

(4) Hard-hitting pro-family commercials came too late

In the final few weeks when they finally hit the airwaves with a "red meat" anti-gay marriage commercial, it was too little, too late.

This mirrored a disturbing pattern we noticed in past gay marriage races. Our side would use the "soft" message until it became clear that the race was in trouble of losing. Then at the last minute bring in the hard-hitting David and Tonia Parker / Robb and Robin Wirthlin TV ads. They were first used in the California Prop 8 reverendum in 2008, and have been used in several since then.

These ads are emotional and direct. The Massachusetts parents describe how their elementary school children were read children's books describing homosexual relationships. The schools refused to let parents opt out their kids or even be notified. When the Parkers and Wirthlins took it to court, a federal judge ruled against them -- because "gay marriage" in Massachusetts obliges schools to portray homosexual relationships as equivalent to real marriage. The ads are very effective.




VIDEO: Maine version of the hard-hitting David and Tonia Parker TV ad.


But in all four states, the Parker / Wirthlin ads were held back until about two weeks before the election, then finally unleashed. But that was too late, according to activists we talked to. These -- and similar ads -- should have been on the air for months.

It's clear that the gay lobby hates and fears these ads, and anticipated them. In Maryland, the homosexual groups ran TV ads all summer saying that homosexual issues would NOT be taught in the schools. Nevertheless, as soon as the Parker ads showed up they seemed to panic, and their only defense was to claim that the Parkers were lying, which their allies in the media ran with.

These ads really exploited the homosexual lobby's weakness. As one Maryland activist told us, "Our side should have been running the David Parker ads early and often."

(5) Obama and the targeting of the black community

This past summer Barack Obama announced his support for gay marriage. In Maryland, where blacks have been a large anti-gay marriage constituency, this had a terrible effect on many black churches. Almost immediately many either stopped dealing with the issue and some even switched to supporting it.

The homosexual lobby used that crisis to its full advantage by directing huge efforts and money into a full-court press to target blacks to support homosexual marriage. Not long after the White House announcement, they created very slick pro-gay marriage flyer featuring Michelle Obama which was widely distributed in the black community. It was even brought to the polls by some voters.

But their biggest target was the black churches, which they started working on even before the Obama announcement. Back in January, Maryland's pro-gay Governor helped persuade two of the most prominent black ministers in the state -- who had already started to go soft on the issue -- to take an active role in persuading their community to abandon their support for traditional marriage.

The two pastors, Rev. Donte Hickman Sr., pastor of Southern Baptist Church in East Baltimore and Rev. Delman Coates, who leads a megachurch in Prince George's County, were ultimately a major part of the homosexual lobby's propaganda campaign.

As the Baltimore Sun later described, things progressed considerably since their January meeting with the Governor: Ten months later, the two had become the highest-profile pitchmen for Question 6, appearing in nearly identical commercials that played on television for three-quarters of the campaign. In Baltimore -- during some stretches -- the average person saw the commercials 10 times a week.

Voters' approval of Maryland's same-sex marriage law last week can be traced in part to the decision by Hickman, 41, and Coates, 39, to lend their names, faces and reputations to a campaign on an issue that remains highly controversial in their community.

. . . The group [Marylanders for Marriage Equality] spent about $800,000 a week on television time, and Hickman and Coates remained on the air for most of the campaign.




VIDEO: Pro-gay marriage TV ad with Rev.Delman Coates that flooded the Baltimore airwaves.

(6) Intimidation tactics

Probably the most vile aspect of these races was how homosexual activists and their allies turned their intimidation machine into high gear. It started out with everyone on the pro-family side of the issue being loudly labeled a "bigot" and "hater" at every opportunity. Many people became afraid to discuss the issue or even put up signs, we were told, because of this.

Before long it escalated into vandalism. A church in Maine was vandalized with swastikas painted on it to send a strong message to the congregation.

This church in Maine had a pro-marriage message outside.


It was very widespread regarding pro-marriage signs. As one activist in Minnesota told us, "Everybody had signs vandalized, stolen, ripped apart." He added that he even had to go back to his church every few days with a new sign. In Maine it became so blatant that a video of pro-marriage signs being stolen and destroyed was posted on YouTube. Activists in Minnesota also posted a video of a sign being stolen.

VIDEO of pro-marriage signs in Maind being stolen and destroyed.
(7) Confusing ballot language

There was a lot of confusion even when you got into the voting booth. In Maryland and Washington, people were voting whether to overturn their legislatures' passage of a gay marriage law. But in both cases it was worded so that a "no" vote would overturn it and a "yes" vote would keep it. Moreover, wording on the ballot in Maryland referred to issuing "marriage licenses" to any two people and talked about religious protections, rather than the actual text of the law, which clouded the issue. Some people told us that the wording looked pro-family, and almost didn't realize it wasn't.

(8) Ballot fraud

During early voting in Maryland, in many cases the touch-screen machines which created paper ballots did not register the "no" votes on the marriage ballot question; instead it come out blank. One woman told us that she noticed hers came out blank, and she had to go back and re-vote on it. She said that this happened to many others she knew of, and that one person had to go back three times to get his "no" vote properly registered. This is outrageous.

At least one relatively conservative area in Maryland surprisingly voted "yes" for gay marriage. There is suspicion that some kind of voter fraud was behind that. "It was really startling that we lost there," one local activist told us.

We have been informed that pro-family attorneys are getting involved in the continuing counting of absentee ballots in some of the key areas where the vote was close.

(9) The Democrat machine vs GOP non-help

The Democratic Party machine and its various allies were actively helping the homosexual lobby. In Maryland, teachers' union people were handing out their pro-gay ballot sheets at the polls. But as far as we could tell, the GOP played a very minor role, if any. In Maryland, the GOP did robo-calls supporting candidates and one ballot question, but didn't mention this one. In Maine the GOP also avoided this issue. Some GOP politicians came out for marriage in Minnesota, but were very moderate in their approach. On the national level, the Romney people had stated that marriage was not an issue in their campaign and they offered no support.

(10) The media

The news media continued its overwhelmingly biased coverage of the gay marriage issue and the homosexual issue in general. This was particularly noticable in the simultaneous attacks on the David and Tonia Parker ads by media in all four states.

But also, television's general embrace and normalization of homosexuality in its prime-time programming has had its intended effect of softening up many people on this issue. And conversely, the media routinely portray the pro-family side as bigoted, hateful, and dysfunctional.

Conclusion

All four of these races were lost for basically the same reasons: Our side was enormously outspent and out-organized, along with a phalanx of other forces enumerated above.

Furthermore, the groups running the campaign opposing gay marriage had an arsenal of weapons about homosexuality, homosexual behavior, and the destructive nature of homosexual relationships that they didn't use because it would not be "politically correct" and would likely anger the liberal media -- and because it wouldn't be seen as "nice." And when they finally were willing to use the very effective issue of schools forcing homosexuality on kids, it was too late.

Voters are now so dumbed down and are constantly fed a twisted view of church and religion by the media and academia. They don't examine issues but follow emotional and often illogical propaganda. So the verdict often comes out: "Everybody should be happy. Leave it up to God. My nephew's gay, so it should be legal."

It's not surprising that, as mentioned above, they are already talking about using these campaigns as a template for "turning over" other states one by one. And of course, they are also focused on overturning DOMA (the federal Defense of Marriage Act, allowing states to stand by their own laws banning same-sex marriage).

Nevertheless, we are still confident of the future.

Looking at everything they had to do, it's still very clear that the ONLY way the homosexual lobby can win a gay marriage referendum - even in these four very blue states, and by those relatively small margins -- is through the extraordinary measures and expenditures listed above, along with our acquiescence on moderating our opposing message.

If our side can get its ideological act together, toss out our milquetoast rhetoric, get some political courage, and be aggressive rather than reactive, we would be pretty unstoppable. But right now, that's a big "if."
  2. Important: Where we go from here.


Someone once said that the Left treats elections like a war and conservatives treat them like a dinner party. That's certainly what it felt like this time.

Any honest assessment would be that the pro-family, pro-life movement has been steadily losing, and the losses are getting worse. This year, just for starters, four states were bombarded by the homosexual lobby in "gay marriage" referendums; Obama homosexualized large parts of the military and the federal government; Chick-fil-A was attacked over that issue; and of course the GLBT push into the nation's school system  continues.

But we haven't seen anything yet. After this year's elections, especially with Obama continuing in power, we can expect our adversaries and even our government to become more ruthless and hostile than ever regarding these issues.

The conservative movement's current strategy isn't making us stronger but rather weaker. For example, not a single major "conservative conference" all year even discussed the homosexual agenda (and there was very little on abortion), even though it has been literally the 800-pound gorilla in the "culture war" living room. That's astounding. And we know why: It's considered too controversial, angers the Left too much; upsets libertarians, comes off as intolerant, and so on. That's what our movement has come to, and we are paying the price.

We need a different way of fighting the "culture war," a whole new paradigm.

Most people of a certain age have forgotten what normality was like. We discuss "gay marriage" as if it were just another philosophical issue. It wasn't too long ago that if you were to bring up the idea of men "marrying" each other, you would have been seen as having lost your mind. In the context of human history, it is beyond a lunatic concept. And it will be again, you can bank on that. This, too, shall pass. The only question is: How long will it take? The answer: It's up to us.

The progressive agenda is a house of cards that cannot be sustained without the constant pressure of propaganda and intimidation. It is actually exactly the opposite of the Civil Rights movement -- which they claim to be the inheritors of -- but which is universally seen as natural, not unnatural. Despite their mantra, ultimately history is on our side, not theirs.

We at MassResistance cannot change how every other pro-family group does things. That's a given. But we can change ourselves.

MassResistance is dedicating itself to giving as many people as possible the tools and guidance to fight back (a) fearlessly and (b) effectively.

During this election season we tried to study as many various movements and freedom struggles over the last century and across the political spectrum as we could. We looked at successes and failures around the world. Our conclusion is that all of this is winnable.

One thing is painfully clear: At this point in America the average person is emotionally and intellectually unequipped to confront the Orwellian and often vicious onslaught of propaganda, disinformation, threats, intimidation confusion -- and the force of law that often follows -- which engulfs us. That is something we must change.

Pope John Paul II famously observed that a major force that facilitated the collapse of the Soviet Union was the people who were no longer afraid to tell the truth. That's a beginning, along with internalizing the fact that we're in a war and not at a dinner party. And that being reactive instead of being aggressive only slows down our losses. All nonviolent movements understand that.Over the last few months we've been contacted by activists from as far away as England and Australia, as well as several states across the U.S., wanting to form MassResistance chapters! If you think that the Left can't stand us now, just wait!

What you can do to help right now...

(fundraising appeal)

"True unity can only be established around God, around the truth, around principle. Anything else is, at best , a fruitless diversion, or, at worst, a dangerous, destructive delusion. "

-- Tom Hoefling, November 12, 2012

"I refuse to listen to the counsels of despair, whether such counsels come from my dearest friend or my fiercest foe. To despair is to sin. Don't give in to the temptation, no matter how strong it might be, no matter your outward circumstance. God Almighty still rules and reigns over the affairs of men. He still cares about a single sparrow that falls to the ground. And He still cares lovingly for you. He has promised to take care of you, has He not? Despair seeks to make a liar out of the One Who is Truth. Reject it, and remember that the joy of the Lord is your strength."

-- Tom Hoefling, November 12, 2012

"Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole."

-- George Washington, Farewell Address

“16 Who will rise up for me against the evildoers?
Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?
17 Unless the Lord had been my help,
My soul would soon have settled in silence.
18 If I say, “My foot slips,”
Your mercy, O Lord, will hold me up.
19 In the multitude of my anxieties within me,
Your comforts delight my soul.

20 Shall the throne of iniquity, which devises evil by law,
Have fellowship with You?
21 They gather together against the life of the righteous,
And condemn innocent blood.
22 But the Lord has been my defense,
And my God the rock of my refuge.
23 He has brought on them their own iniquity,
And shall cut them off in their own wickedness;
The Lord our God shall cut them off.” 

-- Psalm 94: 16-23

"The only way back for America is for its Christians to once again do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with their God, and for its citizens to strive with all their might to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. "

-- Tom Hoefling, November 10, 2012

Abraham Lincoln, speech in Lewiston, Illinois, August 17, 1858, four days before his first historic debate with Stephen A. Douglas:

"The Declaration of Independence was formed by the representatives of American liberty from thirteen States of the Confederacy, twelve of which were slaveholding communities. We need not discuss the way or the reason of their becoming slave-holding communities. It is sufficient for our purpose that all of them greatly deplored the evil and that they placed a provision in the Constitution which they supposed would gradually remove the disease by cutting off its source. This was the abolition of the slave trade. So general was the conviction, the public determination, to abolish the African slave trade, that the provision which I have referred to as being placed in the Constitution declared that it should not be abolished prior to the year 1808. A constitutional provision was necessary to prevent the people, through Congress, from putting a stop to the traffic immediately at the close of the war. Now if slavery had been a good thing, would the Fathers of the Republic have taken a step calculated to diminish its beneficent influences among themselves, and snatch the boon wholly from their posterity? These communities, by their representatives in old Independence Hall, said to the whole world of men: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' This was their majestic interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of the Creator to his creatures. Yes, gentlemen, to all his creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the Divine image and likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on and degraded, and imbruted by its fellows. They grasped not only the whole race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide their children, and their children's children, and the countless myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity to breed tyrants, and so they established these great self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man, some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that none but rich men, or none but white men, or none but Anglo-Saxon white men, were entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to renew the battle which their fathers began, so that truth and justice and mercy and all the humane and Christian virtues might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles on which the temple of liberty was being built.

"Now, my countrymen, if you have been taught doctrines conflicting with the great landmarks of the Declaration of Independence; if you have listened to suggestions which would take away from its grandeur and mutilate the fair symmetry of its proportions; if you have been inclined to believe that all men are not created equal in those inalienable rights enumerated by our chart of liberty, let me entreat you to come back. Return to the fountain whose waters spring close by the blood of the Revolution. Think nothing of me — take no thought for the political fate of any man whomsoever — but come back to the truths that are in the Declaration of Independence. You may do anything with me you choose, if you will but heed these sacred principles. You may not only defeat me for the Senate, but you may take me and put me to death. While pretending no indifference to earthly honors, I do claim to be actuated in this contest by something higher than an anxiety for office. I charge you to drop every paltry and insignificant thought for any man's success. It is nothing; I am nothing; Judge Douglas is nothing. But do not destroy that immortal emblem of Humanity — the Declaration of American Independence."

Printed in the Chicago Press and Tribune.

By Tom Hoefling

"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it." -- Patrick Henry, 'Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death'

Extreme radicals may, for the moment, control our White House and the U.S. Senate.

The U.S. House of Representatives may, for now, be run primarily by spineless, unprincipled men, selfishly and stupidly doing what they ought not, while despising their oaths and neglecting to do what they ought.

The Supreme Court may currently be filled with those who have little or no understanding of the actual law; of the eternal, moral, natural law principles of the Declaration of Independence or the clearly-stated purposes and explicit, imperative requirements of the United States Constitution.

Our great historic political parties may have been made into completely corrupted, co-opted, propagandistic shams.

Media and academia may be moral and intellectual wastelands.

Business and the economy may be anemic as they are slowly bled dry by statist, socialistic, out-of-control, illegitimate, unconstitutional government.

And yet, God Almighty remains on His Throne.

We the People remain, to this day and hour, a sovereign people, under God.

Many of us still "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..." and  "That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

Millions of us retain our firm allegiance and unwavering commitment to the Constitution and righteous, republican, representative self-government.

We remain free to defend ourselves, and to freely exercise our God-given, unalienable rights to worship and pray, to associate, to assemble, to petition, to organize, to speak, to write, to publish.

My friends and fellow Americans, please, exercise your God-given rights to the maximum now, while you can, not just for yourselves, but for your posterity.

As you do so, take heart from the fact that we have the truth on our side. Take courage and resolution from your faith in the One Who rules forever. Draw strength and sustenance from one another. For we know that God is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. His providential Hand has always moved on behalf of those who walk in faith and obedience to Him. He will help us, if we will only humble ourselves, seek Him, and boldly and courageously stand up to fight for what is eternally good, and true, and right.

Speak the truth in love, and live out that love toward your fellow citizens, so that they can understand that, in fact, what you are saying is real.

Please, do it now, I beg you, before it is too late for us, for our children, and for the United States of America.

"They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a...guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power....millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains...! The war is inevitable²and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come. It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace²but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? 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!"  

-- Patrick Henry, 'Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death'