The Violation of Our Contract

    On September 28, 1787 fifty-five delegates from the states, after several months of deliberation, presented a wholly new form of government to the states and the people for their consideration.  The purpose of this government was outlined in the preamble:

    This was the culmination of the principles of the Declaration of Independence.

    "We the people"  of the several states had agreed to form a government for a specific purpose.  Any such government formed with the "consent of the governed" is now an entity in and of itself and it has a contract with the people.  The people contract with this entity, relinquishing some part of their liberty and money, for the purposes of accomplishing ends they cannot achieve individually.  Regardless of what President Lincoln said about the government being "of the people, by the people and for the people", the government, once formed, is an entity in and of itself, just like a corporation, an "individual" separate from the actual people that make it up.  However, in a democracy or representative republic, the rights of the people under the contract become obscured because we feel we are part of the government, that it is "of the people" because we elect the people that run it.  If those people become despotic and trample on our liberty or steal our money, we are more inclined to accept it because in some sense, we voted for it.  This is not how we should think of it, however.
    Instead of a representative republic, let's say that we had set up an absolute ruler for life.  We eliminated any elected officials and set up a king to make our decisions and applied all the constitutional limits, including the bill of rights, to this king.  What we would have done was make a contract with an individual rather than a corporation of elected officials.  We would have given him specific powers and expected him to perform according to the terms of the contract.  If he violated that contract, stealing money for purposes not in the contract, restricting liberties guaranteed under the bill of rights, acting with favoritism and refusing to protect the people, we would consider that king in violation of the contract and we would be well within our rights to remove him and replace him with either another individual or a new system that we believe would be more effective in performing our stated desires.
    Of course, we do not have a king, at least not yet.  We have a group of elected representatives who are supposed to run the government in ways that fulfill the purposes of the contract.  If we elect someone who seeks power not provided for in the contract or  who supports policies that will be detrimental to the stated purposes of the contract, we can remove them through election or impeachment.  It is like getting ready to eat an apple and finding a bruise on one side.  You can cut out the bad part and the apple is still good.  However, if the whole apple is rotten, there is no saving it.  Our government is rotten to the core, we have a systemic problem in which the specific terms of the contract as well as its stated purpose are violated as the rule rather than the exception.  The vast majority of the people in the Federal Government, both elected and appointed, who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, routinely ignore both its letter and spirit.  That being the case, "we the people" are justified in responding to those violations.  It is our right and duty, considering our posterity, to "alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government." 
      Although other essays will detail these violations, allow me a summary.  The purpose of the contract was to "establish a more perfect Union."  A union of what?  Sovereign states who had sent representatives to the convention to better insure their cooperation as a national confederation.  These states have become, for all intents and purposes, simply political extensions of the Federal Government, which is the complete opposite of the original intent.  While within the first century of our history, the states theoretically had the right to withdrawal if they found their sovereignty threatened, the Federal Government under President Lincoln decided they no longer had that right.  States, like individuals, that are forcibly restrained lose their ultimate right of self determination and have liberty only at the behest of the ruler.  God given rights have become state given rights.
    "Establish Justice."  Is there any justice in a country where those with the best paid lawyers or connections can get away with anything?  Where those who are entrusted with the power of government operate above the law?  Where rules and regulations are used to destroy those who threaten the power structure while those within that power structure ignore them with impunity?  Where individuals and groups are afforded privileged status not through merit but heredity?  The equal application of the law is the hallmark of a just society and is our only protection from the tyranny of man.
    "Insure domestic Tranquility."  The purpose of government is to create an environment in which the people can prosper in peace.  This requires sound economic policy.  As Thomas Jefferson said, government "should not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned."  The adoption of heavy taxes and policies that disincentive productivity are one thing.  Placing upon us debts we have no hope of repaying and destroying our currency is another.  There will be no domestic tranquility when the dollar collapses, the economy really goes in the toilet and people have trouble providing for their basic needs.  These policies are criminal and put us in grave danger.
    "Provide for the common defense."  We have the greatest military the world has ever seen but we hamper it with politically correct rules and regulations that make it impotent, and have done so since the Vietnam War.  If we are not willing to do what is necessary to destroy the enemy, we will lose any conflict.  To make this worse, we now have an administration whose policy it is to coddle terrorists, cozy up to brutal dictators and allow our monetary policy and energy resources to be held hostage by countries  who do not have our best interests at heart.  Add to that a decades long dereliction of duty in the enforcement of our borders and we have a government that has put us at risk economically and physically.  This is the most fundamental function of government, our common protection, and to expose the people of this country to harm through neglect or active policy is the height of irresponsibility.
    "Promote the general Welfare."  This does not mean to create a welfare state!  This is to guarantee our right to the "pursuit of happiness."  We should be able to pursue our desires and dreams on a level playing field unencumbered by onerous taxes and regulation.  The more government gets involved, the less level the playing field and the more of our wealth they confiscate.  Socialist democracies have found very creative ways to wring more and more money out of their people and ours is no different.  Politicians who believe they need to protect us from ourselves have passed the most restrictive and absurd regulations.  Government is responsible for maintaining a fair and just system and we are responsible for our actions within it.  Our government believes it is responsible for us, protecting us from our own failure and stupidity while punishing our success.  This is not freedom.
    "Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."  Will our children be free when they suffer the consequences of our crushing debt?  Will we be free when the President, through his communist underlings, silences dissent in the media?  Will we be free to live as we want, eat what we want, and live where we want, when the government decides what is good for us and what areas are environmentally acceptable?  Patrick Henry said that "Liberty ought to be the direct end of your government."  Our liberty, and that of our children, is the last thing on this government's mind.
    When the people agree to form a government they need to be vigilant to ensure that the terms of the contract are met.  We have not been.  We have had times when we traded freedom for security.  There have been times we have allowed government power to protect the greed of special interests.  We have submitted to pressure to do things "for the children" that have done nothing but ensure their slavery.  When we start to use government as a means to ends not within the parameters of the contract, there is no stopping it.  The person that uses it one day may find it used against him in the next.  As each new interest adds another layer of complexity and power, government grows and grows until it no longer becomes responsive to "we the people" but only to itself and the perpetuation of its power.  Once that happens, the contract becomes null and void and it is time to start over.   
   

A Case for Secession

  Perhaps the better question is, "How far are you willing to go to preserve it?"  This question was brought to mind as a consequence of the most recent protest I organized outside our local congressman's office.  Most protests, especially in our little backwater and with only twenty five people, don't make much of an impact.  In its organization, however, I sent out an e-mail stating that I was going to hang the congressman in effigy, which I did-life size.  We had a good protest, the congressman's press secretary fielded questions and criticisms for over a half hour and I believe we made our point.
    Two days later I get a call that informed me that my picture with the hanging congressman was being commented on in the Politico.com.  The article and about half the comments were less than complimentary.  The main point was that if my action was the face of the GOP's criticism of Democrat Health Care, the GOP was in big trouble.  Of course, I do not represent the GOP nor am I a republican.  I am just a citizen trying to get his point across.  Quite a few thought it inappropriate and in bad taste to hang our congressman in effigy. Personally, I think these power hungry people in our federal Government are traitors to the constitution and the founding principles of the Republic.  None of them are upholding their oath of office.  They are unprofessional-what lawyer signs a contract without reading it!?  They are foolish for thinking they can spend, borrow and print so much money without consequence.  They are enemies of liberty for thinking that government should have the power to determine the temperature of our homes or the medicines we receive.  Most of us know this is wrong and it will not end well for this country if it continues.  Barak Obama said he was going to "Transform America".  He is trying to transform it into a Marxist state with power concentrated at the top and no aspect of our lives too small or insignificant to be beyond its control.  No thank you.
    This has not happened overnight, its taken one hundred years.  One step here, one leap there, sometimes pausingm, but never retreating.  We have an opportunity now, as president Obama tries the biggest leap since the New Deal, to catch the statist monster in the air and throw it back on its heels.  The question is, are we willing to do whatever it takes?  Are we finally going to draw a line in the sand?  If we don't now, then when?  Ten or twenty years from now when you need that new operation or expensive medicine and the health care bureaucrat turns to you and says, "You've had a good run, here's your pain pill."  It will be too late.  When ATF shows up outside your home and demands your guns, are you going to give them up or make them pry them out of your cold dead hands?  Where's all that non-violent claptrap then, or when child protective services forces you to send your kid to a government school or deems your "hateful" form of religion nonproductive to the raising of properly adjusted children?  What percentage of your income is too much?  60%, 70%, 90%?  When do you refuse to allow your money to be confiscated and given to the non-productive and lazy?  What will you do when they come to throw you in jail for being so "stingy", refusing to put your "skin in the game?"  When all this borrowing and spending leads to hyperinflation and wage and price controls and the scarcity that goes with it, who are you going to blame?  Are you going to be able to look in the mirror and say "I did everything I could" or will you finally understand that by letting the statist set the rules with political correctness and by refusing to consider all options for resistance, the battle and the war were already lost. 
    The government holds all the cards, or so it thinks.  They become more and more bold the more they get away with.  Every time an election rolls around and ninety-five percent of them are returned to office irregardless of their out of control behavior, they behave more like kings, and thugs.  When the opposition whines about things they may pause or simply try a new way of accomplishing their goal.  I want you to understand something very important.  The goal of the majority of people in government, particularly this current crop, is totalitarian control.  Do you get that?  They want to control everything.  Sure, you may think you have choices but they are only choices approved of by them.  The car you drive, it has to meet hundreds of government specs, few of which have to do with safety.  This is only going to get worse.  They have nationalized banks, they control behavior through taxes and regulation, they want to control the food you eat, the people you associate with (racist!), how much money you earn, the list could go on and on.  This is the very definition of totalitarianism and the antithesis of liberty.    It has all happened because we let it.  And because it has happened over such a long period of time, we are often unaware of how much we have lost.  When do we say "enough?"  And if we say it now, how far are we willing to go to show we mean it?  If a little thing like hanging the congressman in effigy bothers you, then our cause is lost.  The occasional quiet protest, the calls and e-mails, even the occasional turnover of congress will only be a pause in the march to total state control.  I for one, do not want my children to grow up in that nation, do you?