Today, some delegates at the Communist and Cut-Throat Club also know as the United Nations laughed at President Donald Trump while he was giving a speech at its headquarters today. Well, we will see who at this vile, racist anti-American organization will laugh when the United States leaves the U.N. and kicks its delegates out of New York.
Here is a link to an excellent presentation that John McManus did at our 2018 family camp:
Sam Blumenfeld was a founding member of the Jewish Society of Americanists. We have a collection of the organization’s newsletter’s which we believe is the only place where they are available. Here is a link to the collection:
On Sept. 19, 1796, the American Daily Advertiser published George Washington’s farewell address. For years, it was required reading in the schools of the United States. While reading the address is not on the agenda of most of today’s “educators,” it certainly is on Camp Constitution’s agenda.
Download the address reprinted by Camp Constitution Press:
Also available on SCRIBD:
And a link to a video of a reading of Washington’s Farewell Address by Pastor Garrett Lear:
Tuesday morning September 11, 2001, I left my home in Hyde Park (Boston) and took the subway to Logan Airport. It was a beautiful late summer day. I boarded a plane to Detroit (Wayne County Airport). The plane was suppose to fly onto LA. It was the same terminal which two of the planes that were hijacked. originated. When the plane was making its descent into Wayne County Airport, the pilot’s reassuring vice came over the PA” “There has been a security breech and you will have make other arrangements.” When we deplaned and arrived into the terminal, we soon realized what that breech was.
Let us not only remember the victims of the tragedy and their families, but the evil monsters responsible for the attack. And the attack wasn’t done because the terrorists were jealous of our way of life. It was a preemptive strike by militant Muslims who have long declared war against the West.
By Samuel Blumenfeld
Recently, a friend of mine, an antiquarian book dealer, bought a box of early 19th century
pamphlets at a book auction, among which was an 1828 Catalogue of Dartmouth College.
I had an opportunity to examine this fragile 24-page catalogue and was quite intrigued by
the Course of Study students were required to take in those days.
Dartmouth College, at Hanover, New Hampshire, as my readers may know, is one of
America’s prestigious Ivy League liberal arts universities. It was founded in 1769 by
Eleazar Wheelock, a Puritan minister, with a charter signed in behalf of King George the
Third of Great Britain. Indeed, it was the last colonial college to be chartered by the
King of England. By the way, that ancient charter, encased in glass, is on display at the
In 1816, the State of New Hampshire tried to convert the college into a state university by
amending its charter. The college objected, and it engaged Daniel Webster, an alumnus
of the Class of 1802, to argue their case against the State of New Hampshire before the
U.S. Supreme Court. The Court decided that the state’s amendment to Dartmouth’s
original charter was “an illegal impairment of a contract by the state” and thereby
reversed New Hampshire’s takeover, thus permitting Dartmouth to retain its
independence as a private institution, which is why it is still called Dartmouth College
instead of Dartmouth University, even though it confers all of the degrees of a university.
But my real interest was not so much in the history of this institution but rather in what
the students were expected to learn in their four years at Hanover. I shall simply record
what is in the Catalogue. Freshmen, in their First Term, studied: Titus Livius, Lib. V.
priores. Xenoph. Cyrop.& Anab. Adam’s Roman Antiquities. Aelianus, Polyaenus and
Theophrastus. Collectanea Graeca Majora. Danzel, 2 vols. Herodotus.
In the Second Term they studied Homer, Q. Horatius, and Porter’s Analysis. In the
Third Term they studied Hesiod., Arithmetick, and Algebra. In addition, there were
exercises in Reading, Declamation, Translation, and English Composition, through the
Sophomores, in their First Term, studied Thucydides, Demosth., Lysias. Tyler’s Elements
of General History. Cicero de Oratore. Euclid’s Elements of Geometry, 6 Books. Second
Term: Xenophon, Phil., Isocrates, Dionysus, & Plato. Excerpta Latina. Plain
Trigonometry. Mensuration of Superf. and Solids. Guaging. Mensuration of Heights and
Distances. Third Term: Surveying. Navigation. Campbell’s Rhetorick. Logick. Plus
Composition and Declamation.
Juniors, in their First Term: Taciti. Historia. Conick Sections and Spherick Geometry and
Trigonometry. Chemistry. Second Term: Eurip. Med. and Oed. Tyr. Natural Philosophy
and Astronomy. Paley’s Natural Theology. Third Term: Paley’s Moral and Political
Seniors First Term consisted of: Locke’s Essay’s. Butler’s Analogy. Stewart’s
Philosophy. Second Term: Cicero de Officiis. Greek Testament Reviewed. Edwards on
the Will. Say’s Political Economy. Paley’s Evidences of Christianity. Third Term:
Federalist. Plus Dissertations, Forensick, Disputes, and Declamations. Private Instruction
is permitted in the French and other Modern Languages.
Incidentally, tuition was $27.00. Room $7.00. Board for 38 weeks $54.72. Wood, Lights,
and Washing $9.75. Ordinary Incidentals $2.40. Total $100.87.
As you can see, not only has the dollar been incredibly inflated by now, but also the kind
of education today’s college students get has also been devalued. In some universities,
the first year is spent learning to read and write, which so many students were not taught
in their public schools. I was delighted that back in 1838 they were studying Say’s
Political Economy, which is one of the libertarian classics studied today by free-market
oriented students. And I wonder how many of today’s college students have read the
I have not seen Dartmouth’s current catalogue, but I assume that this great college has
also succumbed to political correctness, like so many other of our Ivy League schools.
But from reading this rigorous course of study that Dartmouth students in 1838 were
required to undergo, I can see how the great ancient Greek and Latin classics played an
important role in the development of the American intellect.
And today, few students are taught Logic, or how to think rationally. Left wing American
intellectuals have swallowed the poison pill of Marxist socialism and think nothing of
trashing Christianity, the religion upon which this great nation was built.
But the Tea Party movement indicates that things are changing. Even though we have the
most anti-American president sitting in the White House, there is hope that he will be
removed in the next presidential election.
Back in 1828, Andrew Jackson was elected President. His fight against the Bank of the
United States was an important issue in his reelection in 1832. You can be sure that the
students and faculty at Dartmouth had much to say about presidential politics. The fact
that they were reading the works of Jean-Baptiste Say (1767-1832) indicates they were
interested in the nation’s economy.
Say emphasized the importance of sound economic principles. He believed that freeing
the market was the best way to reduce poverty and eliminate the inequalities created by
state regulation. In a lecture given in 1832, he said:
“In general, it results from the study of political economy that it is best in most cases for
men to be left to themselves because it is thus that they reach a development of their
faculties. Only political economy makes known the true ties that bind men in society [the
benefits from free exchange]. It sets property on its true foundations, and shows its
relation to personal abilities [and] new inventions…. Instead of founding public prosperity
on brute force, political economy founds it on the well-understood [peaceful] interests of
That economic philosophy today is considered extreme, laissez-faire, libertarianism. But
in 1828, it made sense and was responsible for the enormous growth and development of
the American economy, which by 1928 had made America the richest, most technically
advanced, and powerful nation on earth.
Today, laissez-faire economics is considered passe. Government has grown so large, so
intrusive in our lives, that most Americans have become addicted to government control
of their very existence. Public employee unions have become our masters instead of our
servants. Every company and corporation in the country is at the mercy of environmental
regulators, and the value of our money is being manipulated and inflated by government
The students of 1828 had much to look forward to. But all that the students of 2011 can
look forward to is a mountain of government debt, trillions of dollars, that is beyond the
average mind to comprehend. And any attempt to return to sound economic and
political policies is met by howling public employee demonstrations, demagogic
Congressmen, and cowardly business CEOs.
With a revolutionary socialist in the White House, America is being ruled by a leader
whose very ideology calls for the destruction of everything that has made America the
greatest and freest nation on earth. Will we survive his destructive work? The
presidential election of 2012 will provide the answer.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive! — Walter Scott
2018 proved to be a horrible legislative year for the convention lobby. It measures its success by the number of State Legislatures it cajoles into passing applications[i] asking Congress to call a constitutional convention (con-con) pursuant to Article V of the US Constitution.
Fear of a “runaway” convention is the biggest obstacle to state legislators’ voting for Article V convention applications. So, in order to get their votes, the convention lobby misled legislators into believing convention Delegates can’t run away and propose “unauthorized” amendments or rewrite our Constitution. They said the convention will be controlled from start to finish by the very legislators whose votes they needed!
Thus, the con-con lobby contrived the false narrative that Congress can’t call a convention until it receives similar or identical applications from 34 states (two-thirds); that the Delegates would be limited to the subject/s listed on the state applications; and that an Article V convention is different than a “constitutional convention,” where our Constitution can be replaced.
To bolster these false claims, front groups for the globalist agenda have been pushing a number of applications on different subjects, as if each special interest group were applying for its own convention, e.g. to propose a balanced budget amendment (BBA); congressional term limits; overturning Citizens United, etc. State legislators, for the most part, believed what the convention lobby told them and voted for their state’s application when they agreed with the subject cited in the application.
But the convention lobby hit a wall in 2018 and failed to convince any new States Legislatures to pass applications.[ii] Article V convention applications now generate massive pushback from the grassroots of both parties, and state legislators are no longer easy targets for what convention operatives are selling. So, some operatives are testing a new strategy. They are ignoring their own deceptive talking points for allaying legislators’ fears of a runaway convention; they are reinventing how Congress should count to 34; and they are saying that enough states have passed applications already to trigger a convention!
The convention lobby is betraying the state legislators who believed them and cast their votes accordingly. Convention proponents now appear to have a multi-pronged approach with contradictory spins, depending upon their audience. They are appealing to Congress to call a general convention based on assorted, existing applications; and to state legislators to pass still more “limited” applications or possibly affirm applications from decades, even centuries ago–whatever works!
Article V provides that when two-thirds of the States (34) ask Congress to call a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution, Congress shall call a convention. The power to “call” the convention is delegated to Congress; and Art. I, §8, last clause, gives to Congress the power to make all laws necessary and proper to carry out that power. The Constitution doesn’t permit States to dictate how Congress goes about “calling” the convention or what Delegates may and may not do at the convention. The only power the States have is to ask Congress to call the convention. See this Chart.
Our only precedent for an “amendments convention” is the Federal Convention of 1787 which was called by the Continental Congress “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation.” But instead, the Delegates ignored Congress’s limiting instructions (and the limiting instructions from their States) and wrote a new Constitution – the one we have today.
Opponents point out that Delegates to an Article V convention, as sovereign representatives of “We the People,” would have the inherent right to throw off our Form of Government, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, para 2. And in Federalist No. 40 (15th para), James Madison invoked “the transcendent and precious right of the people to abolish or alter their governments” as justification for writing a new Constitution at the federal convention of 1787.
Moreover, we don’t know who the Delegates would be or how they’d be selected! Why wouldn’t they be susceptible to the same bribes, threats and temptations as members of Congress and State Legislatures? The framers and other wise men have warned that convention Delegates can’t be controlled.[iii] It is because of these acknowledged dangers that the con-con lobby constructed its false narrative.
Major players pushing the con-con
Five groups have had significant success pushing Article V convention applications at State Legislatures in the last five years. Each of these groups claims passage of their legislation in 34 states to be their goal.[iv] They also claim a convention called by Congress on their behalf would necessarily be limited to the subject of their group’s application. The first four groups are from the phony right:
Hundreds of Applications
There have been hundreds of Applications for an Article V convention since our Constitution was ratified in 1788, yet Congress has never called a convention. COSP uses this fact to assure state legislators that Congress counts the applications by subject, and a convention would be limited to the scope of the application. From the COSP website,
“We have never had a Convention because we have never had two-thirds of the States agree on the subject matter. State legislatures control the subject matter. Just as the calling of the Convention is subject to the subject matter limitation, all stages of the Article V process are likewise prohibited from going outside this limitation.”[xi]
But it is up to Congress to decide which applications to count and how to count them. Perhaps Congress never had what they consider “active” applications from two-thirds of the States. Congress didn’t start a formal process for keeping track of Article V convention applications until 2015. Moreover, whatever way Congress chooses to count applications has no bearing on the Delegates’ plenipotentiary powers to throw off the Constitution we have and set up a new one.
Up until 2018, half-truths and misleading arguments, along with a multi-million-dollar propaganda campaign, netted the convention lobby some degree of success. But by January, 2018, their legislation came to a grinding halt at Legislatures nationwide due to grassroots opposition, and convention operatives were forced to rethink their strategy.
Natelson’s new way to count to 34
Enter Rob Natelson, the convention lobby’s go-to guru, who announced in 2010 that the words “constitutional convention” would no longer cross his lips.[xii] Natelson redefined an Article V convention as a “convention of the states,” thus implying that State Legislatures will control the convention and thus can prevent a “runaway” convention.
Similarly, on May 9, 2018, in 9,000 mind-numbing words, Natelson audaciously told Congress how to count to 34.[xiii] If he can no longer convince state legislators to jump aboard a sinking ship, perhaps he can convince Congress that the ship already made it to port!
To wit, Natelson defines “plenary” or “unlimited” applications as those existing applications that don’t mention a subject in their “operative” (Resolved) clauses. Many of these ostensibly unlimited applications are peppered with references to averting the civil war (1861) or the direct election of senators, the latter which Congress addressed with the 17th amendment (ratified 1913). Natelson treats these “plenary” applications as wildcards in a game of rummy and says they should be added to any group’s count. Natelson found 6 wildcards to add to his BBATF count and voila! Natelson declares BBATF 97% of the way to its goal– just one state short of 34.[xiv]
Natelson concludes that Congress should count all “plenary” applications on its way to 34, but that the convention called would be limited to the subject of the narrowest application counted. His scheme would double COSP’s wins, triple that of Wolf-PAC, quadruple CFA’s, and boost US Term Limits by a factor of 8! Natelson gives any new group promoting a con-con on any subject, e.g. the definition of marriage or repeal of the Second Amendment, 15 wildcards right out of the gate –propelling them almost halfway to the finish line!
In fact, Congress can count applications however they like. So Natelson’s method qualifies as one way for Congress to count. What is shameless on Natelson’s part, however, is that his convoluted scheme contradicts the snake oil sold to state legislators to pass pro-convention legislation. For years, COSP and Natelson have been adamant that applications need to be identical or similar to aggregate.
ACF’s inconvenient truth
On the heels of Natelson’s attempt to resuscitate the con-con movement comes a “white paper”[xv] dated June 15, 2018, from the American Constitution Foundation (ACF), a new group that admits they are “focused on a strategy to trigger a Congressional call for an Article V convention…prior to the Nov. 2020 national elections.” ACF appears to be still another group of apologists for the con-con movement with ties to BBATF, COSP and other Koch-funded organizations.[xvi] Or they may be a front group for all major players.
ACF’s white paper is an admission, long asserted by those opposed to a convention, that an Article V convention can’t be limited by subject:
“ACF contends Congress can only call a general convention for proposing amendments, irrespective of the subject or set of subjects specified in applications. This would be a plenary convention by nature…and is commonly referred to as a general convention or a constitutional convention[xvii], [xviii]…”
For purposes of counting applications, ACF counts only applications that don’t specify an exclusive purpose for calling a convention.[xix] Interestingly, ACF counts COSP applications as aggregating for a plenary or general convention, since one of its subjects, the “‘power and jurisdiction’ is what the Constitution is all about”!
Thus, ACF admits that a congressional call can’t limit a convention by subject, and Delegates can’t be limited by the scope of the application. It then follows that any convention called would be a convention for all factions, and Delegates could propose any amendments or write a completely new Constitution.[xx] This clearly puts Soros and the Kochs on the same team.
Conveniently, ACF’s own aggregation study counts 37 states with valid applications and concludes that Congress already has sufficient applications to call the convention. ACF agrees with opponents that convention Delegates can propose any amendments irrespective of the subject of the application. But because ACF fails to consider the Fundamental Act of our Founding, the Declaration of Independence, it denies that a new Constitution could result.[xxi]
ACF says that the limited-by-subject narrative: 1) isn’t supported by evidence; 2) contributed to the convention lobby’s legislative failures; and 3) empowered their opposition.[xxii] That may be, but proponents used that narrative to deceive legislators into thinking they could control Delegates in order to win legislators’ “yes” votes on the applications. And now that con-con applications are failing, ACF, like Natelson, is test-driving an alternative way to get to 34 with already-passed applications.
But ACF realizes that catapulting themselves over the finish line overnight doesn’t fit the old narrative, and it will take some convincing for Congress and state legislators to believe a convention has been triggered already.[xxiii]
A Slippery Slope
Might convention operatives be going down a slippery slope here? They’ve spent 5 years and untold millions of dollars convincing state legislators that an application limited by subject is the first line of defense in preventing a “runaway” convention.
And now, with State Legislatures blocking their applications at every turn, operatives are desperate to trigger a convention any way they can. So, they are contradicting one of their most widely-believed deceptions and admitting that a convention can’t be limited by the scope of the application. This makes hundreds of previously-passed applications available for counting to 34. And there may be as many ways to count as there are applications!
Will this reversal backfire? Might more legislators realize that if the grassroots opposition was correct about Article V conventions being unlimited, they might also be correct about State Legislatures being unable to prevent a runaway convention[xxiv] or Delegates having the inherent right to abolish our Form of Government?!
A Tangled Web
The con-con is on life-support, but convention operatives are cunning, heavily funded, and not about to give up easily. Their massive propaganda machine rolls on to convince legislators that their constituents give a rip about an Article V convention. They work through fake news and, seemingly, anything that money can buy, like a big payroll, pricey software, misleading surveys, petitions,[xxv] endorsements from celebrities with no expertise on our Constitution, former US Senators with a knack for leaning on state legislators, lobbyists, internet trolls, media promotions and appearances, hype, hoopla, and more.
Despite huge losses, convention operatives are doubling down in their fight against truth and logic. They are testing a politically premature victory shout in order to induce Congress to call a constitutional convention before state legislators discover they’ve been duped and rescind applications en masse. The major players, entrenched in falsehoods, are unlikely to embrace a general convention publicly.[xxvi] But it is telling that none have disavowed the new spin either.
We now have some convention proponents and possibly all opponents agreeing that conventions can’t be limited by subject. This alone should be a wake-up call for legislators who have been deceived into supporting Article V applications.
Rescission is the key
It is only because of 2016 and 2017 rescissions of all their previously-passed Article V convention applications that Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico and Nevada are not on anyone’s list of states with valid Article V applications.[xxvii] And know your history! The balanced budget amendment (BBA) movement isn’t new. By 1983, 32 states had passed applications asking Congress to call a convention to propose a BBA. This, too, was a globalist movement to replace our Constitution using a “conservative” issue to snare Republican votes.[xxviii] It was only because 16 State Legislatures rescinded their applications between 1988 and 2010 that the scheme was thwarted for a generation.[xxix]
[i] Article V convention applications are passed by State Legislatures as bills or resolutions.
[ii] Except redundant applications. See subheading: Major players pushing the con-con: 4) US Term Limits.
[iv] When states pass CFA bills, they are right then and there ratifying the amendment which delegates massive new taxing powers to Congress. So, CFA seeks 38 states, the number of states needed to ratify an amendment.
[vi] HI, IA, ID, KS, KY, MD, MN, MS, NC, NE, NH, SC, SD, UT, VT, WA, WV, & WY.
[vii] BBATF passed applications in 16 states between 2010 and 2017 and counts 12 similar applications passed between 1976 and 1983. But in 2018, BBATF applications were rejected by KY, ME, MS, SC, VA & WA.
[viii] US Term Limits (USTL) passed its application in FL (2016), AL (2018) & MO (2018). Those states previously passed COSP applications asking Congress to call a convention to, among other things, limit the terms of office for federal officials and/or members of Congress. USTL failed to pass in at least nine states in 2018: AZ, GA, MD, ME, MS, NH, SC, TN, & VT.
[ix] Bruce Parker, “Soros in Vermont: Leftist billionaire behind state’s call to keep money out of politics,” Watchdog, 6 May 2014.
[x] CO, HI, IA, LA, MA, MD, ME, MO, NE, NM, OK, SC, WA, WI, & WV.
[xii] Robert G. Natelson, “The State-Application-And-Convention Method of Amending the Constitution: The Founding Era Vision,” 16 Sept. 2010, 10.
[xiv] In getting to 33, Natelson accepts 27 of BAATF’s count of 28 and adds 6 “wildcard” states that hadn’t already passed a BBA application.
[xv] American Constitution Foundation, “White Paper on an Article V General Convention of States, 15 June 2018, 1.
[xix] Ibid., 1.
[xx] James Madison said it best: Letter to Turberville, 2 Nov. 1788. “…a General Convention…would be courted by the most violent partizans on both sides…[and] would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views who under the mask of seeking alterations…might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric [of our country].”
[xxviii] “The Ford Foundation’s Pursuit of Globalism: The Con Con Connection,” Patriot Coalition
[xxix] Larry Greenley, “Save the Constitution by Rescinding Article V Convention Applications” The New American, 12 Jan. 2016.
 Article V convention applications are passed by State Legislatures as bills or resolutions.
 Except redundant applications. See subheading: Major players pushing the con-con: 4) US Term Limits.
 See Brilliant Men flyer.
 When states pass CFA bills, they are right then and there ratifying the amendment which delegates massive new taxing powers to Congress. So, CFA seeks 38 states, the number of states needed to ratify an amendment.
 Nancy Thorner, “Koch Brothers’ Money Funds Pro-Con Con Agenda,” Illinois Review, 19 May 2017
 HI, IA, ID, KS, KY, MD, MN, MS, NC, NE, NH, SC, SD, UT, VT, WA, WV, & WY.
 BBATF passed applications in 16 states between 2010 and 2017 and counts 12 similar applications passed between 1976 and 1983. But in 2018, BBATF applications were rejected by KY, ME, MS, SC, VA & WA.
 US Term Limits (USTL) passed its application in FL (2016), AL (2018) & MO (2018). Those states previously passed COSP applications asking Congress to call a convention to, among other things, limit the terms of office for federal officials and/or members of Congress. USTL failed to pass in at least nine states in 2018: AZ, GA, MD, ME, MS, NH, SC, TN, & VT.
 Bruce Parker, “Soros in Vermont: Leftist billionaire behind state’s call to keep money out of politics,” Watchdog, 6 May 2014.
 CO, HI, IA, LA, MA, MD, ME, MO, NE, NM, OK, SC, WA, WI, & WV.
 Robert G. Natelson, “The State-Application-And-Convention Method of Amending the Constitution: The Founding Era Vision,” 16 Sept. 2010, 10.
 Robert G. Natelson, “Counting to Two Thirds…,” Federalist Society Review, 9 May 2018, Vol. 19.
 In getting to 33, Natelson accepts 27 of BAATF’s count of 28 and adds 6 “wildcard” states that hadn’t already passed a BBA application.
 American Constitution Foundation, “White Paper on an Article V General Convention of States, 15 June 2018, 1.
 American Constitution Foundation, White Paper, 1.
 Ibid., 1.
 James Madison said it best: Letter to Turberville, 2 Nov. 1788. “…a General Convention…would be courted by the most violent partizans on both sides…[and] would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views who under the mask of seeking alterations…might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric [of our country].”
 American Constitution Foundation, White Paper, 7 (conclusion).
 Publius Huldah, “Why states can’t prevent a runaway convention,” 16 Sept. 2017.
 Idaho Rep calls COSP petitions “high-tech fraud,” Rep. Priscilla Giddings: Should Idaho Support a constitutional convention?, Gem State Patriot News, 16 Dec 2017.
 US Term Limits is the only group to date that publicly acknowledges they could be at 25 states (instead of three) “based on one legal interpretation.”
 Although in an Aug. 13, 2018 ARTICLE, Natelson makes a silly case for discarding rescission resolutions from 7 states because their terminology doesn’t conform to the false narrative.
 “The Ford Foundation’s Pursuit of Globalism: The Con Con Connection,” Patriot Coalition
 Larry Greenley, “Save the Constitution by Rescinding Article V Convention Applications” The New American, 12 Jan. 2016.
 To get a new Constitution, the con-con lobby needs a convention. Which Constitution will be proposed at the convention? George Soros wants a socialist Constitution by 2020; the Koch Brothers appear to want a constitution moving the United States into the North American Union; the Ford Foundation commissioned the Proposed Constitution for the Newstates of America which forms a dictatorship.
 Delegates, as Sovereign Representatives of the People, are not answerable to State Legislatures (which are “mere creatures” of the state constitutions) or to Congress (which is a “mere creature” of the federal Constitution). Therefore, delegate laws cannot control Delegates; they are designed to give legislators a false sense of security in voting for Article V convention applications.
© Judi Caler
Judi Caler lives in California and is Article V Issues Director for Eagle Forum of CA. She is passionate about holding our public servants accountable to their oath to support the U.S. Constitution.
In search of the Constitutional Ideals of America
written by Dennis Jamison August 30, 2018
Since 2018 is an election year, and since recently there has arisen such a Leftist assault upon the ideals and principles embedded in the Constitution of the United States, it seemed appropriate to set out on a search to find the Constitutional ideals in America. In other words, in light of the civil war that is raging across America over the ideals in the bedrock of the nation, it was important to at least one person to see if the U.S.A. is still “run by the book,” or whether the federal and state governments are following the original blueprint of the founding fathers.
An invitation to attend Camp Constitution in the summer seemed opportune, but it was being held on the other side of the country, in Massachusetts. A hard decision had to be made as to whether traveling across the United States by automobile would provide a good return on the investment of time and the physical endeavor required — especially for someone well past 60 years of age. This article would not have been written if the investment had not been worthwhile. Driving from California to Massachusetts is a challenge for many people, but if taken in somewhat manageable increments it is much less daunting. On the way, stopping off near Salt Lake City to visit friends, a clear instructional moment occurred as I was made aware that even Bible-believing Christians are tolerated in Mormon dominated Utah. And, even Mormons, not being considered mainstream Christians, are tolerated in the U.S.A. This was a living lesson about the very First Amendment. So, I was receiving an education on the Constitution before I ever arrived at Camp Constitution. It occurred to me that our Bill of Rights were created by the founders who were both wise and blessed with vision for the future. It was that is reassuring to know that Freedom of Religion still exists in the U.S. despite the recent attacks against the First Amendment,
In visiting family and friends in Iowa, open discussions between Atheists, Catholics, Lutherans, and Bible-focused Christians, was refreshing as we were all civil with one another, No arguments erupted that escalated into flaring tempers and displays of anger over who was right or wrong.. It was gratifying that the wars that were fought in Europe centuries before were no longer being waged in 2018, or Iowa would have been a battleground state. Reflecting on this current state of affairs in America provided additional gratitude that the founders had made it clear in the First Amendment that there was to be no establishment of a state religion, as had been practiced regularly in battle-beleaguered Europe. Unfortunately, upon deeper reflection, it is apparent that there exists today in America a remnant of the Europe that turned against religion being embodied in the mistaken concept of separation of church and state. The founders did not want a state mandated religion, but they also did not want a government that interfered with religious worship or “the free exercise of religion.” Sadly, the Bill of Rights has been contorted by politics and political figures that sought to re-write the Bill of Rights with their own interpretation, or under their own agenda, which was intended to limit or restrict religious practice in the United States. It is a fundamental problem for those who profess a religious faith in 2018. This reality alone should awaken people of faith in relation to how their freedoms are viewed by contemporary politicians.
There are those in the hallowed halls of America’s current government institutions that are actively doing their utmost to undermine the well-being of the people who have some avowed faith. This represents an area in which Leftists, who are essentially atheistic, are assaulting the ideals, principles, and values within the Constitution. It is a source of great concern for the people of faith because the faithless are using the Constitution against them and their rights to freely exercise their religious faith, which runs counter to the original intent of the First Amendment. Amazingly, it Is a divisive issue among Christian ministers because some ministers believe that the government has the right to silence them by threats of revoking precious government rewards for their silence (tax-exemptions prove effective in the battle for freedom of speech).
Yet, it was refreshing to learn at Camp Constitution that the First Amendment rights that were supposed to be protected under the U.S. Constitution have not yet been revoked! The battle is still raging, however, as citizens are aware that humble bakers can be slandered, sued, and/or fined for refusing to bake a cake for people whose lifestyle offends their religious sentiments. Yet, there are those in government positions who believe it is acceptable to offend people of faith, and unacceptable to offend those who have no faith. The realization that the reason for the quest to find America’s true relationship with the Constitutional ideals, is a reason for all Americans to start to question the people they are electing to public office. After all, 2018 is an election year. It is a good time to start a quest to find how the Constitutional ideals are being practiced by those seeking votes from the public.
At Camp Constitution, it was refreshing to learn that some of our elected political figures still believe in the ideals, principles, and values embedded in the Constitution. Yet, while the camp was in session, the organizer of Camp Constitution, Hal Shurtleff, and Rev. Steven Craft, and Pastor Earl Wallace, and Dr. Kishore went to attend court when represented by Liberty Counsel, oral argument was given in Boston, Massachusetts in a federal lawsuit “against the city of Boston and one of its officials for censoring the Christian flag that Boston resident Hal Shurtleff and his Christian civic organization, Camp Constitution, requested to fly on the city’s public forum.” This effort of standing for citizens’ fundamental rights was a very practical lesson of application of the principles embedded in the Constitution. The realization was strong that the organizers of Camp Constitution not only taught these principles, they were willing to defend them as well.
Yes, it is about time — 2018 is a good time for all concerned American citizens to start a quest to find how the Constitutional ideals are being implemented by our government officials in America.All that Mr. Shurtleff had requested through a city permit was to raise the Christian flag on Boston City Hall flagpoles “to commemorate Constitution Day (September 17) and the civic and cultural contributions of the Christian community to the city of Boston…” The denial from the city prompted the lawsuit, which can be a time-consuming hassle to many, but to the American citizens who are concerned about the blatant disregard for the rights enshrined in the Constitution, it is not some inconvenient hassle, it is a duty to protect and defend those rights while they still exist.
One of the most refreshing discoveries at Camp Constitution was the many polite, cheerful, and articulate young people. Despite the dynamic and powerful speakers at the camp, the quality of the young people who attended could not go unnoticed. They were able to answer questions on the Constitution that some adults were not able to answer. A memory of some of the televised “man in the street” impromptu interviews of local citizens who revealed hilariously dumbfounded ignorance of the Constitution or the U.S. government created a sense of gratitude for what the kids at Camp Constitution would learn in the summer. In reality, America’s children are the future of our nation, and they are enough reason to start an individual quest to discover how the Constitutional ideals are being practiced in America in 2018. American citizens who care would be proud of the kids that attended Camp Constitution. These kids receive the truth about the actual way that Constitutional ideals are being practiced by our national, state, and local governments in America. The speakers were all capable of keeping an adult audience on their toes with the education they imparted at the camp. More significantly, the various presentations dealt not just with the fundamentals of the Constitution, but with the actual application of the law of the land to contemporary strife in the nation regarding law, legalities, and the fundamental battle over how Constitutional ideals are being implemented on all levels.
Although Camp Constitution was only a week long, it provided hope that maybe all is not lost in the U.S.A. just yet. Although there is only one Camp Constitution that is held each summer, there are some who would like to see other Camp Constitutions spring up across the entire country. All Americans will be challenged in 2018 with a decision to vote or not vote, and if they do vote, the choice of whom to vote for can be daunting if they take their rights seriously. Often Americans are uncomfortable with challenges that threaten to burst their limited, ego-centric bubbles, but this challenge has never been greater. It is the time Ronald Reagan described as the time of choosing for this generation. Americans are facing choices in November that literally will determine the fate of the nation’s existence as formulated by the Founding Fathers. Today, there are people who call themselves Americans, but they are intent upon undermining, if not destroying, the fundamental rights that have been guaranteed and protected by our federal and state governments since the beginning. American citizens can choose to ignore such an insidious effort to continue it; however, that effort will not go away, the rights people fought and died for will go away. It truly is a time of choosing.
For the sake of the future, America needs more Camp Constitutions. Despite the thought that the public schools today are adequately preparing our young people to properly govern our nation “by the book,” according to law of the land, it is being done poorly at best. One concern among many citizens contacted along the journey eastward was that American students in the public schools are being indoctrinated by teachers who do not have any faith, and who may not have the best interests of the United States at heart. It is a fact that the current education in public schools no longer includes civics, and the system of preparing our future leaders must not be working very well because very few leaders that are entering the political arena understand or value the Constitution. Upon returning to California, it was revealed that a flyer announcing a local “Constitution Day” event had been deemed “too offensive” to pass around in a city sports field. The manager, a city official, had (like many who work for local city and county governments) to offer an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. It was easy for the person who calls himself an
American to swear an oath to get a job, but not so easy to offer personal allegiance to the rights of citizens who actually pay taxes for his employment with the city. It was refreshing to learn that at least one local County Supervisor in California still knows how to protect fundamental freedomsthat many take for granted — or find offensive. The flyers were distributed. Small challenges need to be won on a daily basis. America does need more Camp Constitutions because it is a place where young people learn how to win challenges to the Constitutional ideals and principles — even on a small scale. America needs more Camp Constitutions because it is a place where the young people learn how to out into practice and to defend the Constitutional ideals and principles on all levels. Although such camps aim at educating young people, their parents and volunteers are also able to learn valuable lessons in self-governance and proper application of America’s founding values in everyday life experiences. A simple conclusion is that America needs more Camp Constitutions for the sake of America’s future.
In a ruling against Hal Shurtleff and Camp Constitution U.S. District Judge Denise Casper stated:
“Certainly, an event to ‘raise the Christian flag’ could serve some of plaintiffs’ cited secular purposes, such as the celebration of religious freedom in Boston and the contributions of Boston’s Christian residents to the city,” the ruling states. “However, its primary purpose would be to convey government endorsement of a particular religion by displaying the Christian flag alongside that of the United States and the commonwealth in front of City Hall. Blowing in the wind, these side-by-side flags could quite literally become entangled. If plaintiffs were not seeking government endorsement, then Plaintiffs would presumably be content to raise their own flag on their own in the same location as has been suggested.”
We shall see if this ruling stands, however, a logical conclusion to the opinion expressed by this Judge is that …
Apparently, everyone is welcome in Boston except Christians. The primary purpose of flying the flag being to convey government endorsement means that Christians are at best tolerated while those advocating behaviors traditionally considered deviant and perverse are in fact endorsed. Make of that what you will.
In addition to the Sam Blumenfeld Archives, Camp Constitution has a YouTube Channel which features a Sam Blumenfeld playlist with a number of Sam’s speeches, and interviews including some of Sam’s last presentations. Readers of this blog are encouraged to subscribe, view and share Camp Constitution’s YouTube page: