Monday, September 23, 2013

The "other half" of the Monroe Doctrine

Students of history know about the Monroe Doctrine's warning to Eurpeans to stay out of the affairs of the Americas.  But very few historians, policy makers and educators seem to remember the other half of it's wise verbage, through which President Monroe set forth a policy that echoed the warnings of George Washington in his Farewell.  Here are the words of the Monroe Doctrine:

The citizens of the United States cherish sentiments the most friendly in favor of the liberty and happiness of their fellow-men on that side of the Atlantic. In the wars of the European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy to do so.

And Washington's clear warnings in greater detail:

"Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it - It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter."

We didn't listen

Obviously, we can see from our current situation that we are deeply involved, and to our detriment, in all of these dangerous relationships, policies and operations.  Like the Roman Legions and the French Foreign Legion, our worldwide web of permanent military bases and other military operations, along with military contractors which differ only in name from our own troops, is beginning to crumble from the weight of it's own financial cost as well as the moral toll from having our men and women shovelled to their far-flung posts without provocation and without the civilizing influence of home.  Further, they are often without a clearly defined mission, and hence morale and unit cohesion suffer.
The Founders were not empire builders.  They believed God had leg them to the "New Israel", a future"shining City" of a nation that would be independent, prosperous, and which would lead by example.  Today we are hated by so many because we have turned our back on this vision.  Americans at home and abroad have been targets of hatred and violence.  We are trying, through brute force, to shape the world into a socialistic leviathan that our Founders never dreamed of, and if they did, it would have been a nightmare.

The story of our fall from greatness is detailed in a well documented book Globocop: How America Sold it's Soul and Lost it's Way.   By Mark David Ledbetter. This book catalogs the three periods of foreign policy from Protection, to Wavering, to Crusading, in which we always are going abroad in search of monsters to destroy.

The situation in which we find ourselves is dangerous, terribly expensive, and is actually changing the culture of America.  Unless the people rise up and wrest the power of government from the hands of these global empire-builders, we are in for the same fate as the Romans.

Read the book.  Share it's sobering ideas and facts.  And get to work taking back America.


Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Celebrating Constitution Day!

By Rick Dalton

Today, 17 September 2013, is the two hundred twenty-sixth anniversary of the signing of our inspired Constitution.  On that day, those elect members of the Constitutional Convention each affixed their signatures to this great document, which created the first free people in modern times, and became the envy of the world.

Use it or lose it

We know that the decline in our standard of living, our traditional morality, and our unity, which has steadily taken place over the past 100 years is due to the rejection of the fundamental principles of the Constitution.  In the early days of the Republic, school children knew more about these principles, and about the documents that recognized and protected them (the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution) than many of our current elected leaders and most of our current population.

And today's "solutions" to our difficulties are made by those same leaders, who are elected by the same population.  We need a resurgence of serious scholarship regarding the origins and meaning of our Constitution, from the earliest grades in school to the halls of our institutes of higher learning.

How Much do You Know?

The duty of each citizen is to educate himself in these principles and to pass them on to his offspring, so that Freedom shall not perish from the earth.  There are many opportunities to learn these exciting principles, including the live seminars, online courses and other educational materials offered by the National Center for Constitutional Studies (  Did you know, for example that the Framers thought that they had prohibited paper money from ever being used in America?  Did you know that they included a method of electing senators that was specifically designed to protect the states against the intentional and unceasing expansion of unconstitutional actions of the federal government which have reduced the states to mere provinces?
Would you know whether a proposed piece of legislation or policy in Congress, state legislature or your local school board is in keeping with sound principles of government?  It is your duty.

Now is the time

Here below is a brief quiz from Wallbuilders (their contact info is below) about some tenets of the Constitution.  Take the quiz, and read further in the recommended literature.  You can also take the Making of America seminar online at, or follow the links to the live seminar schedule.  Either way, my thanks for your continued efforts to expand the cause of liberty.


Pop Quiz!

Like Take the Constitution Day Quiz! on Facebook      share on Twitter

Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

Test Your Knowledge!

"Are Your Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" is a popular television game show. We thought this would be a good question to ask on Constitution Day (September 17, when the U. S. Constitution was signed in 1787). So here are some basic fifth grade questions on the Constitution from an 1828 elementary school textbook. See how you do! (Answers below.)
  1. Did [the states remain entirely distinct countries]?
  2. How often does Congress meet?
  3. May a man's children be punished by law for his offense?
  4. Can [the President] make the law?
  5. What is an oath?
  6. How long do [judges] remain in office?
  7. Why then should not Legislators hold their office in the same way?
  8. What was the subject of the first amendment?
  9. Have the different States of the Union all the powers which rightfully belong to a State, except those which are denied to them by the Constitution?

Find out how you did!
(The answers containing ellipses actually contain answers to multiple questions, so we just included the part addressing the questions above. These are from the 1828 Elementary Catechism on the Constitution of the United States by Arthur Stansbury.)
  1. No. Having been led to unite together to help each other in the war, they soon began to find that it would be much better for each of them that they should all continue united in its farther prosecution, and accordingly they entered into an agreement (which was called a Confederation) in which they made some laws which they all agreed to obey; but after their independence was obtained, finding the defects of this plan, they called a Convention in which they laid a complete plan for uniting all the states under one General Government - this plan is called The Federal Constitution. On this great plan, or Constitution the safety and happiness of the United States does, under Almighty God, mainly depend: all our laws are made by its direction or authority; whoever goes contrary to it injures and betrays his country, injures you, injures me, betrays us all, and is deserving of the heaviest punishment. Whoever, on the contrary, loves and keeps it sacred, is his country's friend, secures his own safety, and farthers the happiness of all around him. Let every America learn, from his earliest years, to love, cherish and obey the Constitution. Without this he can neither be a great or a good citizen; without this his name will never be engraved with honor in the pages of our history, nor transmitted, like that of Washington, with praises and blessings to a late posterity. (pp. 9-10)
  2. It must meet once, at least, in every year; but may meet oftener if necessary. (p. 19)
  3. In some countries, where a man has been guilty of treason, (that is, making war against the Government) a law is passed called a bill of attainder, by which his children are prevented from being heirs to him or to any other person; and, if he belonged to what in those countries is called the nobility, and his children would have belonged to it too, they are prevented; nor can they nor their children, nor their children's children, recover this privilege, till an act is passed for that purpose. No such law can be made in this country; it is expressly forbidden by the Constitution. (p. 38)
  4. Not at all. These two powers, of making law and executing law, are kept by the Constitution, entirely separate; the power that makes the law cannot execute it, and the power that executes the law cannot make it. (The one of these powers is called the Legislative, and the other is the Executive power.) . . . [I]t is the great safeguard of freedom; because, if the one makes oppressive laws, the other may refuse to execute them; or, if the one wishes to do tyrannical acts, the other may refuse to make a law for them. (p. 44)
  5. It is a solemn calling upon God, who knows the hearts of all men, and will call every man to account for his conduct in this world, to bear witness that what a man says is true, or that what he promises he means to perform. . . . [The President's oath of office]: "I do solemnly swear, that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States; and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." (p. 50)
  6. During good behavior; that is, until they resign their office or are turned out of it for some great offense. (p. 61)
  7. Because they make the laws, while Judges only explain and apply them; it would be very dangerous to liberty to give our law makers power for life; they require restraint lest they should become our tyrants; - therefore their time of office is made short, so that if the people think them unwise or unfaithful they may refuse to give them the office again. (p. 62)
  8. The subject of the religious freedom. . . . [T]he right every man has to worship God in such a way as he thinks fit, without being called to account for his opinions or punished for them. . . . Congress was forbidden to make any law respecting an establishment of religion; that is, giving the preference to any one form of religion above another, and making laws to support it; or making laws to prevent men from freely holding or observing any particular form of religious belief and practice. (pp. 68-69)
  9. Yes. When the States united to form a constitution for their General Government, they agreed to give up to that government some of the powers they had before, and they set down in the Constitution what these powers were. All other powers they keep. The same thing is true respecting the people. All the powers they have not given up to the State Governments or to the General Government, they keep in their own hands. (p. 75)
To see more questions, check out Arthur J. Stansbury's 1828
Elementary Catechism on the Constitution of the United States.
Copyright © 2013 WallBuilders, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at one of our websites (,,
Our mailing address is:
PO Box 397
AledoTexas 76008

Friday, September 6, 2013


By Rick Dalton

This post is so important, and this topic so crucial to our prosperity, as a nation, ad individuals, and as states, that I wish to devote the entire space to a marvelous treatment of the topic by Earl Taylor Jr., president of the National Center for Constitutional Studies (

Earl is a mentor, friend, and former employer of mine at Heritage Academy, the charter high school in Mesa Arizona from which I retired in May after fifteen glorious years of teaching American History, World History and Economics.  The title here, is from Thomas Jefferson, who was concerned that after freedom was won, the people would possess enough public virtue to maintain this precious gift from God.

Here below is the link for the current newsletter from NCCS.  I recommend it to you as required knowledge for any person wishing to live under a free republic.