RBESRQ, "right wing facists like you are the cause of the mess we are in." You mean people that care about what the United States Constitution says? People that know liberty comes with responsibility? People that instead of waiting for a government hand-out, work for their daily bread? People like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison that stood up against repressive taxes and an overbearing government to establish the land of liberty and justice? If that is a right-wing fascist than I am honored to be considered among them. We were here when this nation was founded and we were here when this country was its strongest. So we are not the problem, it is you liberals that twist and ignore the text of the Constitution and propogate your socialist principles with promises of spreading the wealth from those who worked for it to those who have not. You are the problem. And yes it is sad, really sad. I am ashamed that you socialists consider yourselves to be my fellow countrymen. I pray that posterity forgets you ever existed.

Reston & RBESRQ, Carlton is not alone in his faith in capitalism or his hatred of socialism. The GOP is but one arm of the enslaving monster, the Democratic Party being the other. But the tea party is completely different. The Tea Party is not a national political party, it does not officially run congressional candidates and its name has not appeared on any ballots. It has no central leadership like the Democrats and Republicans, it is a loose affiliation of small local groups of ordinary American citizens. It was formed to combat the unconstitutional agenda of the current administration; to cutting back the size of government, lowering taxes, reducing wasteful spending, reducing national debt and the federal budget deficit, and adhereing the original interpretation of the United States Constitution. And like I said, Carlton is not alone, 80% of voters in the last election were either members of or agreed with the Tea Parties. This movement is not some minority faction making noise, it is the American People showing their power over the government. It is the voice of America calling for an end to socialism in this country. Socialism removes rights from the People. Those who push socialism are the enemies of liberty. And if you are an enemy of liberty, you are an enemy to our founders, to our veterans, to our heroes, to the principles in which this nation was founded on. And that makes you an enemy of mine as well.

Our democracy shall cease when we remove the labors of those who worked for it, and give to those who would not. All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from defects in their Constitution, nor from want of honor or virtue, so much is downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation. If the people of the voting booths are ignorant, inform them. If the people of the government are ignorant, remove them. And yes, Robert, "If God is for us, who can be against us." Romans 8:31. This nation must always remain with Him, so He will be for us.

Anonymous. The wealthy own businesses, employ workers, and produce goods. In order to make a profit, they pass on all expenses of production (material, labor, and yes TAXES) on to the consumer. Wealthy producers view a tax increase as merely an increase in business expenses. If expenses rise for the producer, the price of the final product will rise for the consumer. Eventually, the product will become unaffordable and the wealthy producer will be forced to cut expenses in other areas, such as labor; which will raise unemployment. No matter how high the taxes are to the rich producer, it is the average American consumer that will pay them.

Today's government often twist the text of the Constitution and rings out the broadest definition possible. Instead of studying the vocabulary of the Constitution, we should study the meaning behind the words. We should study the reasons and manner in which it was ratified. Everyone should read the Federalists Papers. Thomas Jefferson declared them the greatest literary work on the subject of politics in human history. They truly show what the people expected from the government. They reveal what powers the people were willing to invest in the government and which liberties they declared unencroachable. If we wish to know what the words mean to us, we must know what they meant to the people who wrote them and the people that accepted them.

The State has no business meddeling in any individual's spiritual life. The curtailment of liberty NEVER falls within the realm of justice. For justice is nothing other than the will of God. We were endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. So the same God that gave us life also gave us liberty.

The Nazi party is the very definition of tyranny and its leader, Hitler, is the poster child of evil. To adopt socialism is to embrace their motto and follow their precedence. The fact that this nation is even considering such mockery is insult to the heroes that paid the ultimate price to bring this evil empire to justice.

Every society gets the government it deserves. Even in a state of despotism, the people have the choice to kiss the feet of the tyrant or look him in the eye. When the throne of power is contrary to the will of the people, it is not just their right, its their duty to resist. A people must fight despotism, so that their children won't have to. If its fear that pulls them to their knees, than that's exactly where they belong.

No bad deed goes unpunished is the truth I believe. The main problem with the Health Care Bill is not that we don't know how it will work out, its that we along with our representatives that voted it in, and our president that signed it into law, don't even know what it says. Its over two-thousand pages and reflects on court decisions and precedence from years ago that no one has a complete knowledge of. One would literally need volumes of legal publications throughout history to even slightly interpret this bill. This is the same way dictators strangle the people of their country. They pass laws no one can comprehend, which gives them the ability to make up the rules as they go along. If we allow that to take place here, we will not be better off.

While I am not a fan of Freud or a believer in his pseudo science, there is a small degree of truth in this statement. Evil has many weapons to choose from. If one weapon is removed, another will be found. An emotionally mature person, instead of fearing the tool of aggression, would make himself aware of the aggressor and take measures for his own defense. However, the idea that weapons have any impact on sexual maturity, is utterly absurd and degrades the entire quote to a category of myth and superstition.

J Carlton, you often speak of what kids are being taught. Our public schools should put more focus on teaching children the text and meaning of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The first step in preserving rights, is to know what they are. Our children are taught the history and culture of peoples all over the world, in places that most of them will never go. But rarely any can recite the Preamble of the Constitution, the most famous section of the Declaration, or know any of the Bill of Rights. It puzzles me how we, as a society, are more interested in the history and cultures that our forefathers fled from, than the history they lived and the culture they created.

We the People have grown complacent of liberty, having never been without it.

The 2nd Amendment says "...the right to bear arms shall not be infringed." The word "infringed" means to limit, undermine, or encroach on. The government is not only prohibited from outlawing firearms, it doesn't even have the constitutional right to regulate their ownership. It is true that, out of necessity, firearms must be prohibited in schools, courthouses, etc. but the emergency only provision proposed by Waffler, while not abandoning the right, is indeed an infringement. Also, we learn how to safely and effectively operate firearms through practice. If their use were stricken to emergency only situations, no one would know how to use them, making them more dangerous and effectively useless.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquent, it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." George Washington

Waffler, I admire your faith in the strength of our republic and your belief that there will always be a peaceful resolve. I pray that you are indeed correct and the pen always remains mightier than the sword. But the truth is, our republic is not immortal. The older our government gets, the farther it moves from the original republic founded by our forefathers. Consider a candidate for political office. He is charismatic, has integrity, says all the right things, makes all the right promises, and fills the people with hopes and dreams. Of course, he strolls to office with an overwhelming majority. Then, while in office, he forgets his promises, loses his integrity, does all the wrong things, betrays the trust of the people, and shatters their hopes and dreams; all to further his own ambition. Now magnify that to include many candidates and multiply it to include many years. The product is not the republic controlled by the mind and pen of the people, its despotism run by the will of self-ambitious individuals. Also, two major parties have a complete, unrivaled monopoly of our entire political system. They have been locked in battle for decades. If one was to finally enjoy a complete victory and end the life of the other, our republic would be managed and power would be held by a single party and could resemble that of Germany in the 1930s and 40s. However unlikely this is, it must be considered because the life and liberty of ourselves and our children rely on the integrity and purity of the republic. Throughout history every elected government has ended in despotism. It happened to the Greeks, it happened to the Romans, and we cannot overlook the possibility of it happening to us and that the probablity of its occurance increases with time. We must use our knowledge of the past to prepare for the future. I will prepare with the Bible and the gun. And I will also teach my children the Truths of The Book and train them in the operation of the gun. If the tragedy of the fall of our republic does occur, I and/or they will be prepared for it.

Waffler, The Sons of Liberty was an organization of normal citizens that stockpiled arms in barns and many other secret locations throughout their neighborhoods, these guns were in the possession of common men, not armories. Many of the Pennsylvania Quakers did remain nuetral throughout the war. For that, we owe them no debt of gratitude for the liberty we take for granted. However, a large portion of Quakers broke off and formed their own group known as the Fighting Quakers. They served in the Continental Congress and TOOK UP ARMS against the British. For that, they have earned the respected title of Patriots. If the "arms race" you are refering to is the international effort to remove nuclear weapons from most countries throughout the world, than yes I have heard of it. This arms race is spearheaded by the U.S. government for its own national defense; so that other nations cannot attack us and so America remains the supreme power of the Earth. If we allow the Federal Government to do the same within our borders to the American People, the government will similarly become the supreme uncontested power of our nation. In a land of liberty, that power should and must always belong to the People, not the government. The last resort to defend our rights against an oppressive and overbearing totalitarian government is a revolution. When the civil road to liberty is cut off, it must be taken by the sword. If we were to be stripped of our right to bear arms, this ultimate alternative would no longer exist. When the government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, We the People would no longer have the ability to overthrow it and once again establish justice and secure the blessings of liberty.

Waffler, I am puzzled by your complete faith and trust in the Democratic party. Democrats or Republicans, whatever, I myself find all poitical parties equally repulsive and contrary to the cause of liberty. What you fail to recognize is that the Democratic party did not solve the problem. They have magnified it and created a larger problem in which the government believes it has the right to ignore the Constitution. The reason Roosevelt, Truman, Nixon, and Clinton were not successful in passing a Federal Health Policy is because it was contrary to public opinion. The difference between now and then is that Obama doesn't care about the will of the people. He and his followers within the government have no concept of governing by the consent of the governed. You fail to realize that the same people that don't pay their medical bills, also will not pay their insurance bills and again the government will be footing the bill. However, I must agree that this time will be remembered as one of the most enlightened in our political history, but not because of what Obama has done, but because of what the People are doing. And please, do not compare this political party with my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. His Word says "He who does not work will not eat" and "...eat your own bread." 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12. The socialist principles pushed by Obama and his party are far from these Truths and in no way deserve the respect of the comparison.

Mike, I completely agree with you. The term "contract" that I used was simply a metaphor. I apologize for not using one that more properly fits the situation. It was not my intention to infer that We the People owe the government anything, for as I have said, the People are the foundation of all power. However, the government is obligated to pay the people, but not with money or wealth (which is none of the government's business). The obligation of the government is to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and posterity. What I was trying to say is that if We the People don't make the government follow the rules of the Constitution, it won't. We must hold every official accountable for every unconstitutional decision they make, throw them out of office, and provide new guards for our future security.

And another thing Waffler, your reply to Carol shows your belief that an anti-gun law will magically remove guns from the hands of criminals. This is an equally absurd statement. Drugs are against law but the government is having a hell of a time getting them off the streets. Only peaceful and law-abiding citizens obey the law. Therefore, they are the only ones that would give up their guns simply because a law says to. That would render them completely defenseless from the still armed criminal. The best way to cut down on violence, on murder, rape, robbery, etc. is for everyone to be armed and trained how to use those arms. Rarely will one be attacked, if he is knowingly armed and when he is attacked, he has the ability to defend.

Waffler, you say that the American colonists eschewed guns. A not so difficult research into the history of the American colonists and the revolution reveals the absurdity and ignorance of this statement. Britain passed the stamp act so the colonists sent letters petitioning to the king for repeal. Britain passed more oppressive taxes and still the colonies just sent letters listing their greivances. Then Britain laid Boston under seige, forced the people to house soldiers and wouldn't allow any imports or exports into or out of the city, thus starving it and the citizens of. Even this atrocity did not lead to a violent rebellion; the Congress simply sent an olive branch petition to Britain that explained their loyalty to the king and pleaded for mercy. But then, Britain, in order to gain greater control over its colonial subjects, attempted to disarm the colonists. That was the last straw. When the people of Lexington and Concord learned the British army was coming to disarm them, they fired THE SHOT HEARD AROUND THE WORLD. Instead of peacefully submitting to the British Crown and giving up their arms, they used them to protect their life, liberty, and property. The colonists loved their guns because these arms were vital in the effort to throw off the yoke of an oppressive and overbearing government and establish a land of liberty and justice. If they eschewed guns as you say, you would be British. "Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who did not." Thomas Jefferson "Those who trade liberty for security have neither." Ben Franklin "To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason "Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." George Washington "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." Richard Henry Lee "The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." Alexander Hamilton Do these guys really sound like they eschewed arms?

The Constitution is a contract of power between the government and the people. As with all contracts, it is null and void if not enforced by the authoritative party. We the People, being the foundation all power, are the authoritative party that gives government its strength. If We don't force the government to strictly adhere to the rules of the Constitution, it becomes a dead letter and all the rights guaranteed by it become extinct.

No kingdom is completely peaceful and no land can boast a crime rate of zero. No matter how moderate a society is, it cannot avoid the evil agendas of evil people. A law will not disarm these evil people for they care not what the law says. An anti-gun law will succeed only in disarming the law abiding citizens; leaving them completely defenseless against and in the mercy of criminals and tyrants.

J Carlton, yes, I understood your position and your point. I just wanted to expand on the idea.

J Carlton, or anyone else may use any of the ideas expressed under the name Publius as long as your cause is to advocate and defend liberty and justice. That is our duty as citizens of mankind.

J Carlton, a victim is in no way morally superior to a defender. If there is any moral superiority at all, I would place it with the defender. The defender aided in bringing justice to the attacker and possibly prevented a future crime.