Is the New Sarah Palin Just More of the Same?

We have had a pretty hectic past week in politics. Versions of Obama’s health plan are being considered in Congress, oil has slid 10%, there was the meeting between the U.S. and Russia concerning nuclear weapons and, let us not forget, Sarah Palin’s surprising decision to resign as Governor of Alaska. It is this last bit of news that I am interested in taking a look at today. What is Palin really up to? Is this just more of what the media has been labeling “erratic behavior,” or is there more to it than that?

Blind Patriotism is Not True Patriotism

“The highest patriotism is not a blind acceptance of official policy, but a love of one’s country deep enough to call her to a higher standard.”
- George McGovern

What powerful words those are. Yet these days patriotism has become synonymous with blindly supporting one’s government regardless of its course. It hasn’t always been this way. In fact patriotism used to refer to an individual who stood up against domestic tyranny. Such were the men who fought and died for this country’s independence from Great Britain. No one would doubt these men were great patriots. What a difference time makes.

Individual Rights and the Constitution

In June of 2008 the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment refers to an individual’s right to bear arms. Though it has taken 217 years, “Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia [writing for the majority] said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by ‘the historical narrative’ both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted. [1]” Simply stated, since the same wording in the rest of the amendments refers to an individual’s rights it is then correctly understood that the Second Amendment also refers to an individual’s rights. But the question remains why are the Constitutional amendments concerned with the rights of the individual?

Technorati post

hrpui837st

Ignore this post. It is required for Technorati.com.

The Time Has Come to Stand Up and Declare Your Independence

“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, speech to the Virginia Convention, March 23, 1775

One would be hard-pressed to single out a more significant account of today’s situation in America. We are currently facing a recession perpetrated by the very government that we have put into power, with bailouts and social programs engineered to take advantage of this situation and remove a great deal of every individual’s liberty. At no time in history has the grab for our freedom been as great other than during the Great Depression. Just as Patrick Henry’s speech sparked Virginia’s entry into the American Revolution, it must, today, spark the whole of the American people into action.

The Constitution is Not a “Living” Document

When one refers to the Constitution as being a “living” document they are referring to their ability to interpret the meaning behind the words written as they relate to today’s society. This should be the first clue that the Constitution is, in fact, not a “living” document. By reading the debates given at the time by the various Founding Fathers, along with their personal letters, one can see the importance that the individual’s basic rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness held. Therefore, one must ask him or herself why these men would allow for these rights to be usurped by their government. The obvious answer is that they wouldn’t.

On Government Manipulation

Though manipulation of society is commonplace among governments, whether they be Democratic, Collectivist, Totalitarian, or otherwise, it should never be tolerated. Individuals must always remain vigilant in the protection of their neighbor’s liberty, for that is the only way to ensure their own. The dirty truth is that when people lobby for government manipulation it is usually done for one of only two reasons: 1.) the law being considered will give them a significant advantage over their counterparts or 2.) it will force others to live their lives as the lobbyist sees fit. Neither of these constitutes an acceptable excuse for government intervention and manipulation.