Posted on 01/11/2015 5:47:36 PM PST by Strawberry AZ
In case you couldn’t tell by their actions, the GOP currently holds more seats in Congress than they have since 1929, a direct result of mid-term voters demanding change writ large. Their first action was to elect leadership, and incredibly, they chose the same floundering crew who, hand-in-hand with equally inept Democrats in Congress and the White House, have nearly scuttled the Ship of State.
We all know that the definition of “Insanity” is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results. Let me add one to the mix: “Treason”… which one source defines as the betrayal of a trust or confidence, a breach of faith.
If you think I’m talking about the GOP here, you’re wrong. We’d be fools to place trust in a party of elitist career politicians, on either side of the aisle. I’m talking about us. We, the People in the states… the states that joined together 2¼ centuries ago to create the federal government in the first place.
The Founders expected us to be ever-vigilant, to ensure that our federal government never strayed outside the enumerated powers enshrined in the Constitution. To assist us in meeting that tremendous responsibility, they drafted Article V, empowering state legislators to join together and instruct Congress to call a Convention of States to propose amendments to the Constitution. One such amendment, if ratified by ¾ of the states, could impose federal term limits and forever change the insanity that is Washington, DC, no matter which party is at the helm.
In their wisdom, the Founders wisely anticipated the day when the federal government would fail or refuse to respond to the demands of the states. They left us Article V to repair the defects in government perceived by We the Governed. They placed their trust in us… their confidence… their faith. To do anything less is, to some, the very definition of Treason.
Inform yourself at http://www.ConventionOfStates.com, then call your elected state representatives today and urge their support of an Article V Convention of States.
Patrick Henry, 1st Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788
They have already begun to squander the opportunity to show they are different than the democrats.
One of my favorites. Totally fascinating man.
“If this be treason, make the most of it.”
Patrick Henry, Virginia House of Burgesses, 1765
Patrick Henry’s Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention #2
You’d think that they would look to what Reagan did and try to repeat it. He won 49 states his second term. He knew how to lead.
The man certainly had a way with words...
- Patrick Henry - March 23, 1775 -
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities,
of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House.
But different men often see the same subject in different lights;
and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if,
entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs,
I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.
This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country.
For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery;
and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate.
It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility
which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time,
through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country,
and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope.
We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren
till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men,
engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?
Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not,
the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
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.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience.
I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past,
I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years
to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House.
Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received?
Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet.
Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss.
Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations
which cover our waters and darken our land.
Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation?
Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love?
Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation;
the last arguments to which kings resort.
I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission?
Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world,
to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none.
They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other.
They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging.
And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years.
Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing.
We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain.
Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication?
What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted?
Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on.
We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne,
and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.
Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult;
our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne!
In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation.
There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free - if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges
for which we have been so long contending - if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle
in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon
until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained—we must fight!
I repeat it, sir, we must fight!
An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
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 British guard shall be stationed in every house?
Shall we gather strength but 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.
The 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 of Boston!
The war is inevitable—and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter.
Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace - but 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!
For those in Oregon, there will be a Patrick Henry rally on Feruary 9th at the state Capitol, 8:00am.
Maybe it’s time for all TEA Partiers to rally across the nation.
https://www.facebook.com/events/882773421735610/
And today is Alexander Hamilton’s birthday.
“And today is Alexander Hamilton’s birthday.”
Patrick Henry’s polar opposite among the Founders.
Henry was an anti-Federalist who opposed ratifying the Constitution. Hamilton was an arch Federalist who wanted a strong central government.
Patrick Henry: “Give me liberty, or give me death.”
Patrick Henry owned 64 slaves.
“Treason”… which one source defines as the betrayal of a trust or confidence, a breach of faith.’..........
Certainly fits for odumbo and his ilk as well.
When speaking with high school aged kids, I like to ask them, “Who was Patrick Henry and what was he known for saying?” Most of them have no idea who he was or what he said, many think he was some member of a rock band. (Useful IDIOTS, the lot)
Patrick Henry owned 64 slaves.
Absolutely meaningless statement.
I don't think so.
He spoke of liberty for men, yet owned slaves. That's a pretty important insight into his character. Liberty for me, but not for thee.
I feel that a slave owner's opinions on liberty is worthless.
Henry became a Federalist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.