Sons of Liberty
September 11, 1998
. . . If it be asked, what is to restrain the House of Representatives from making legal discriminations in favor of themselves and a particular class of the society? I answer: the genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and above all, the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America- a spirit which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it.
If this spirit shall ever be so far debased as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate any thing but liberty.
Federalist Papers #57
Years ago, I came to a realization about business and management. If the service is good and the people courteous, then the management cares about the business. It is not so much about enforcement of rules, rather, it is a contentment the employees seem to have. On the other hand, if I am treated poorly by a business, I can expect that the management is bottom-line management, and service means a lot less than the profit. I have always inclined myself toward the former.
These past few decades, we have seen a decline in the "service" provided by government. It has gotten so bad that immorality that might have been illegal a few years ago has become front-page news, not a docket in a courtroom.
While listening to the radio on the way to work this morning, a number of people were interviewed about their feelings over the release of the Starr Report in Washington. One mother of a third grade student complained that her biggest problem was how to answer her son"s questions, Mommy, what is oral sex?" Surprisingly, her dilemma was how to answer what oral sex was -- not why her son had been told, in explicit detail, of current events in Washington -- in his third grade classroom.
This afternoon, again, listening to the radio on the way home from work, I heard a Democrat Congressman rationalize away the severity of Clinton"s misdeeds. "After all," he said, "Clinton apologized and is truly repentant for what he did." The Congressman suggested that it was unfair that Clinton had not been able to have his forty-eight hours to rebut the Starr Report. "After all," he said, "Newt Gingrich had several days in which to review his censure."
When was the last time a person charged with a crime by a Grand Jury was allowed to rebut the accusation, before charges were brought and arrests made? Why is it that, today, we, the People, are subject to a different set of guidelines than those who make the rules by which we are expected to be bound? Are we willing to tolerate anything but Liberty?
The discussion continues, in the press and on the Internet, as to whether Clinton should be impeached. Some have suggested disappointment at the Starr Report, suggesting that for forty million dollars, we should have gotten a lot more against the President.
Al Capone lasted years against the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He had power, he had good attorneys, he had political influence. I would guess that in today"s dollars, the prosecution of Scarface would have cost nearly as much as the investigation into Clinton"s despotic abuse of power. It is not Ken Starr"s fault that he ran into nearly insurmountable obstacles in the course of his investigation -- after all, of all of the people in this nation, who is in the best position to obstruct justice effectively? You got it! The same man that has brought oral sex into the third grade classroom. The same person who is ultimately responsible for the enforcement of the laws of the land -- including sexual harassment. The same man who, when responding in sworn deposition with regard to a matter which involved his attempt to receive oral sex from Paula Jones, LIED, but not legally so. The same man who may have brought devastation and death to innocent people in Sudan and Afghanistan to detract from his current problems.
Let"s just look at the scheming family"s means of achieving sympathy by their use of words. It was just a few weeks ago when Hillary appeared before the entire nation and proclaimed, "I didn"t know until Saturday that Bill was going to testify that he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky." When her quote was played on the news, every reporter that I heard explained that, "See, Hillary didn"t know anything about it." Now, we are deaf to what we don"t want to hear, but, I heard something other than what I was hearing reported. Let"s look, very closely, at what Hillary said: I didn"t know until Saturday that Bill was going to TESTIFY that he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky." Well, I"m sure that the final decision as to what Bill would say to the Grand Jury was not determined until Saturday. I"m sure that Hillary knew, long before, that Bill was messing with Monica, and I would suppose that Hillary didn"t really give a damn. I"m also sure that the wording of this message was intended to carry a different message -- and, with the help of the press, it did.
Do you suppose that we have fulfilled James Madison prophecy?
Article II, Section 4 -- The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
MISDEME"ANOR, n. Ill behavior; evil conduct; fault; mismanagement.
1. In law, an offense of a less atrocious nature than a crime. Crimes and misdemeanors are mere synonymous terms; but in common usage, the word crime is made to denote offenses of a deeper and more atrocious dye, while small faults and omissions of less consequence are comprised under the gentler name of misdemeanors. [Webster"s 1828 Dictionary-- the language of our forefathers]
Return to Sons of Liberty Index
Go to Next Sons of Liberty
Go to Previous Sons of Liberty