Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty teeth.

First Inaugural Address of George Washington...April 30, 1789

The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Abraham Lincoln said:

"In this age, and in this country, public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail; against it nothing can suceed. Whoever molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes, or pronounces judicial decisions."

James Madison Declared

The adversaries of the Constitution seem to have lost sight of the PEOPLE altogether in their reasonings on this subject; and to have viewed these different establishments not only as mutual rivals and enemies, but as uncontrolled by any common superior in their efforts to usurp the authorities of each other. These gentlemen must be reminded of their error. They must be told that the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, wherever the derivative may be found, RESIDES IN THE PEOPLE ALONE. (Federalist Papers, No. 46, p.294; emphasis added.)

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Case Law System...will destroy this country

When "relativism" is applied to the law it is called "legal positivism." This "positivism" started in the 1870s when  Harvard Law School Dean Christopher C. Langdell tried to compare apples with oranges; He assumed that Darwin's theory, which is still argued over, of biological evolution could be and should be applied to jurisprudence. He, I believe, to a certain degree, believed that since man evolved, that his laws and the Constitution should evolve under the guidance of judges. It was at that time that students of the law would study decisions of judges rather than the Constitution. Since that time history, precedent, and the views and beliefs of the Founders became more and more irrelevant and the Constitution as a hindrance to the advancement of a "progressive" society. Personally I find the analogy of comparing a biological system and a legal system as totally asinine.

I believe that a leading relativist and progressive, John Dewey, in 1927 was as wrong as he could be when he stated:

"The belief in political fixity, of the sanctity of some form of state consecrated by the efforts of our fathers and hallowed by tradition, is one of the stumbling-blocks in the way of orderly and directed change."

As this approach was gradually adopted by this country's law schools the pillars of the foundation of our nation were eroded and the nation started to become a nation of men and not one of law. The only good I see is that this new theory of relativism increases the business of the legal system and their income. If the foundations of the law keep shifting like the sands in the desert then the arguments defending one position versus another are infinite and can change from day to day or case to case. A nation with this kind of foundation is bound to crumble into a mound of dust in time.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Does Pres. Obama want a new Constitution?

When our country was founded and the founding documents written the underlying document and philosophy which our Founders used was the Bible and natural law philosophy. Sometime around the middle of the twentieth century a new competing philosophy, "relativism", began to gain acceptance especially in some of the so-called elite academic centers. It promulgated that standards of behavior and rules and laws were all relative to the society in which an individual lived in. In essence each man creates his own judgments about what is right and wrong, moral relativism.

When this type of moral relativism is applied to the law it is called "legal positivism." This "legal positivism" is characterized by the following points:
  1. There are no God given standards of law and if perchance there might be they are not relevant in a modern legal system.
  2. Since God does not give us law or rights the author must be man (government) and what it gives it can also take away or change in any manner it wishes. The state is therefore the highest human authority.
  3. Since all of the elite know that both man and society evolve, law and its interpretation must also evolve;so no solid framework on which society can be sure that will not change exists and the whim of man or the state is final.
  4. Judges through their decisions on evolutionary law control the system.
  5. The study of judges (men/women) and not original foundations of the legal system becomes the study of law. In other words we go from a country of LAW to a country of MEN/WOMEN.
I content that when this happens and completely encompasses our land it will lead to the devolution of the country and to its eventual demise. Is this the direction in which President Obama is knowingly taking us? You be the judge both by studying his words and actions.

Hillsdale College - Imprimis

Hillsdale College - Imprimis
Read this...your eyes and mind will be opened.

Ray Stevens - Caribou Barbie

Ray Stevens- Thank you

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Law of the Conservation of Socio-Economic Security

As we all know, in physics we have the Law of the Conservation of Energy; that meaning that if we have a closed system, such as we believe that the Universe is, the total energy in that system stays the same. It may exist in various forms in different locals but the total amount cannot be added to or subtracted from.

I profess that in the area of socio-economic security another law analogous to the Law of Conservation of Energy exists; this law is the Law of Conservation of Socio-Economic Security. The first law mentioned can be proven mathematically and by experiment; the second one, at this time in history, I believe can only be proven true based on the study of human nature and mankinds' history.

Total, perfect, socio-economic security never did exist and it never will exist. When an individual or a government proclaims that we are totally safe they are not telling you the truth because of at least two reasons:
  1. There are too many variables, known and unknown, to make this make this kind of definitive declaration.
  2. Within the current existing market system, security can be granted (even in an imperfect manner) to some entities. Examples might be banks to big to fail, industries to big to fail, GM, and other sectors of the economic world which "planners" deem to big to fail...Fannie and Fredi Mac. At first thought this might seem to be a great idea but after a little thought we all must come to the conclusion that with each guarantee "not to fail" we as non-inclusive groups or as non-inclusive individuals loose bit-by-bit, increment by increment some of our security, liberty and freedom. The government does not possess enough "stuff" to guarantee a "non-failure policy" for each of us.
Wake up America and see what is really going on around you in small positive looking policies that in reality are taking your freedom and your country away from you. Eventually you will have no choice but to submit and obey. Don't let the "planners" destroy our country and your choice to plan for yourself.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Jury clears Christians who dared to preach to U.S. Muslims

Jury clears Christians who dared to preach to U.S. Muslims

Planning for security...a double edged sword

"The planning for security which has such an insidious effect on liberty is that for security of a different kind. It is planning designed to protect individuals or groups against diminutions of their income, which although in no way deserved yet in a competitive society occurs daily, against losses imposing severe hardships having no moral justification yet inseparable from the competitive system. This demand for security is thus another form of the demand for just remuneration - a remuneration commensurate with the subjective merits and not with the objective results of a man's efforts. This kind of security or justice seems irreconcilable with freedom to choose one's employment."* I believe it would eventually lead to one's loss of freedom to choose all things based on the arbitrary wishes, decisions of the "central planner"...totalitarian government. It seems that this is the direction which this current administration is leading us.

* The Road To Serfdom, by F.A. Hayek, The University of Chicago Press, Chapter 9, page 149, paragraph 2

Friday, October 1, 2010

Actions have their consequenses Bill Ayers

Congratulations to UIC board chair Christopher Kennedy and the UIC board of trustees; you made the correct and ethical decision. Actions taken by Bill Ayers during the Vietnam era and even recently in regards to having influence in the Obama administration have their consequences. Ayers was a co-founder of the Weather Underground, which according to various sources was responsible for bombings of government buildings in the early 1970s.

What really is astonishing and saddening is that some faculty members of the U of I at Chicago are considering to ask the board of trustees to reconsider its unanimous decision to not grant Bill Ayers emeritus status. What this indicates to me is what I have always thought to be true, namely that a majority of Universities and Colleges have been infiltrated over the last 50 to 75 years by liberal, progressive...some actually bordering on or actually advocating communist or Maoist models for this country. I think this event has loosened that cap on the bottle that is holding in the philosophy of collectivism and central all inclusive planning and the American people will see it as it is...a plan to fundamentally change bury it. Wake up America or it will be too late.

Illinois Right To Carry Forum

Lakemoor, September 30, 2010 at the Lakemoor Banquet Hall  the McHenry County Right to Carry Association and the McHenry County Sportmen's Association presented the
The Illinois Right To Carry Forum

The meetings topic was: Right to Carry In Illinois

The meeting began at about 7 PM and in attendance were approximately 500 people. The moderator of the forum for the first half of the program was Lou Rofrano, President of McHenry County Right to Carry Association. Speakers who were either present or had written statements read that were all pro-second amendment rights and pro-concealed carry in Illinois were:
  • Don Manzullo     US Congressman 16th District: Candidate
  • Michale Mahon   Candidate for McHenry County Sheriff
  • John O'Neill        Candidate for State Representative 63rd District
  • Suzi Schmidt       Candidate for Illinois Senate District #31
  • Michael Tryon     State Representative 64th District Candidate
  • Mark Curran       Sheriff Lake County Candidate
  • Bill Brady           State Senator Candidate for Governor
  • Joe Walsh           Candidate for US Congress 8th District
The remaining half of the forum was moderated by Dave Roberts, President McHenry County Sportsmen Association.
  • Robert Kaempfe  Candidate for State Representative District  #64
  • Gus Philpott        Candidate for McHenry County Sheriff
  • Michael Bond      State Senator Candidate 31st District
  • Nick Provenzano Candidate McHenry County Board
  • Doug Roberts      Candidate Lake County Sheriff
  • Bill Schuerer       Candidate for US Congress 8th District
If you are interested in knowing more about the McHenry County Right to Carry Association you can go to:

or email them at:

The McHenry County Sportsmen's Association  webside is: