A Report on the Massachusetts Hearing on the Article V Convention
The Massachusetts Joint Committee on Election Laws held a hearing Thursday October 12 from 2:00 – to 5:30 PM on a number of bills and resolutions including two resolutions applying for an Article V Convention (S 379 Wolf PAC and S 401 COS). We sent out two E-mail blasts on the subject, and thanks to Brad Wyatt, the Massachusetts Campaign for Liberty also did an E-mail blast.
I attended the hearing and was accompanied by Tom Moor, and Dave Vieira. Dave did an excellent job in his testimony. The Left had a good contingent of people on hand supporting S 379 from “Massachusetts We the People.” The current director of Wolf PAC and one of their attorneys was also on hand to testify. The main sponsor of the Wolf PAC resolution, Carmine Gentile, testified. His testimony and most of the other supporters of S 379 were more interested in overturning the “Citizens United” decision, and said nothing about the Article V convention. The Wolf PAC attorney was the only one that referenced the Article V Convention. He raised the same old easily refuted arguments. The only person on hand, to my knowledge, supporting the COS resolution WAS full time lobbyist for COS from Maine.
While we were greatly outnumbered, I think we held our own. Most of those that testified on behalf of S 379 gave emotional appeals. The only one that actually discussed the convention was the Wolf PAC attorney, and I was able to refute his testimony. The only question that was raised by a member of the committee concerned a “runaway” convention.” The Wolf PAC attorney said it couldn’t happen. I refuted him by pointing out that I have the Wolf PAC founder Cenk Uygur and Professor Larry Lessig on video both wishing for a runaway convention. Here is the link to the short video clip:https://www.youtube.com/watch…
The Wolf PAC resolution had 40 sponsors, and the COS resolution has two. Two years ago, the Wolf PAC resolution had over 80, and twice as many supporters on hand at the hearing, but we still managed to kill it. While two years ago, the COS resolution had 8-10 sponsors and not one supporter to testify. Both resolutions died in committee.
Thank you for all you do, and making Camp Constitutuon’s activities possible.
Hal Shurtleff
Director, Camp Constitution
12 March Ave.
West Roxbury, MA 02132
857-498-1309
www.campconstitution.net
Director, Camp Constitution
12 March Ave.
West Roxbury, MA 02132
857-498-1309
www.campconstitution.net
The Weekly Sam: The Benefits of Teaching History at Home
This is an article written by Sam Blumenfeld in the 1980s:
The other day I was having dinner at a friend’s house and was chatting with his
12-year-old daughter who attends a local public school. I asked her how she was doing,
and she told me that she hated school-not merely disliked schoo~ but hated it. I had
hoped that her parents would home-school her. But they just couldn’t do it. I told her I
thought I knew why she hated school-because it was boring. Yes, she replied. It was
boring. And then I said, “And you’re probably not learning much also.” She wanted to
know what I meant by that. So I asked her to name the first three wars that the United
States was involved with. She got the first one all right, the Revolutionary War. But the
only other war she could think of was the Civil War, and she had no idea when that took
place.
The second war, I told her, was the one fought against the Barbary pirates of
North Africa who kidnapped Americans for ransom. An American invasion of
Tripolitania brought that war to a victorious end. My friend’s daughter had never heard
of that war. The fact is that most Americans have never heard of it. But the anthem of
the U.S. Marine Corps should remind us: “From the halls ofMontezuma, to the Shores of
Tripoli… ”
The third war was the War of 1812. She had never heard of that one either. She
had never heard of the Battle of New Orleans, or the burning of Washington by the
British, or Andrew Jackson, the hero of that war who later became our seventh President.
“But I know all about the Industrial Revolution,” she volunteered. It turned out
that her class had been studying the cotton mills ofNew England and how young girls
were being exploited by the mill owners who were rich and mean. So, at the age of 12,
she was already being indoctrinated to view factory owners as exploiters of poor young
girls.
She had heard ofEli Whitney and the cotton gin. But she had never heard of
Robert Fulton and the steamboat. In other words, the public schools were teaching
“social studies” not history. Their aim was to indoctrinate children in a pro-socialist view
of our history by emphasizing the meanness of capitalism.
But homeschoolers have the freedom to teach history as history and not as
propagandistic social studies. History is such a fascinating subject and can be studied in
so many different ways: chronologically, by reading biographies and autobiographies, by
unit studies, by concentrating on certain eras and events. The Civil War commands great
interest for many reasons. Thousands of books have been written about virtually every
aspect of that war. There are even organizations that stage mock battles of the Civil War,
with uniforms and weapons made to the exact specifications of the real things.
Every American should have a foundational knowledge of American history in
order to affirm one’s American identity and heritage. Our nation’s history is such a
remarkable story, so full of great and wonderful people, so vibrant with human endeavor
and enterprise, so stirring in its afftrmation of freedom and love of country, that it
behooves a home schooling parent to learn and teach history to one’s children as a means
of making sure that a child understands what it means to be an American.
Americans, and homeschoolers in particular, have a responsibility of transferring
to future generations the philosophy of our founding fathers, who sacrificed so much so
that we could enjoy the fruits of liberty. It is only through knowledge of history that we
can make sure that our free society continues to exist in decades ahead.
It is, of course, a tragedy that millions of young Americans will never learn
history in their public schools, which have betrayed the trust that parents have, over the
years, placed in them. But it is the opinion of this writer that government schools have
never been compatible with the principles of a free society in which parents have the
responsibility of educating their children in accordance with their own values and beliefs.
Prof. Benjamin Bloom, father of Outcome-Based Education, wrote in his famous
Taxonomy: “By educational objectives, we mean explicit formulations of the ways in
which students are expected to be changed by the educative process. That is, the ways in
which they will change in their thinking, their feelings, and their actions.”
Knowing how important it was to start indoctrinating children as early as
possible, Bloom wrote: “The evidence points out convincingly to the fact that age is a
factor operating against attempts to effect a complete or thorough-going reorganization of
attitudes and values …. The evidence collected thus far suggests that a single hour of
classroom activity under certain conditions may bring about a major reorganization in
cognitive as well as affective behaviors.”
Those are not the words of an educator who respects the values and beliefs of
parents whose children he is about to indoctrinate.
A link to the article from the Sam Blumenfeld Archives:
Click to access Benefits%20of%20Teaching%20History%20at%20Home.pdf
The Blumenfeld Archives
Convention of States adopts newspeak to sell the Con-Con by Judi Caler
October 7, 2017
Convention of States adopts newspeak to sell the Con-Con
By Judi Caler
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” – Joseph Goebbels
Newspeak
In the novel, “1984,” George Orwell’s unsettling prophecy of a totalitarian society, Newspeak was the official language of Oceania. It was devised to limit freedom of thought. New words were invented, undesirable words eliminated, and the remaining words redefined or limited in scope to further the Party’s ideology. If something can’t be said, it can’t be thought, making a diverging thought unthinkable.
So too, the Convention of States Project (COS) uses Newspeak to manipulate people into believing that the convention provided for by Article V of our Constitution is really a “convention of the states” that is controlled from start to finish by State Legislatures.
“Convention of the States” v. “Constitutional Convention”
On September 24-25, 2011, radical leftist professor Larry Lessig, who has ties to George Soros, and salesman Mark Meckler, who now heads COS, co-hosted Conference on the Constitutional Convention at Harvard. That conference kicked off the current push for the Left and the phony Right to work together to promote an Article V Convention.
But the Convention Lobby soon realized that conservatives had been schooled over previous decades by the John Birch Society and Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum to recoil from an Article V convention, also known as a “constitutional convention” or “con-con,” because it could run amok and replace our existing Constitution.
And despite their attempt to win conservative support by focusing state Article V convention applications on supposedly “conservative” issues like a “balanced budget amendment” or “fiscal restraints,” convention proponents were met with resistance from those who understood that State Legislatures have no power to limit the scope of a convention to specific topics or amendments.1 The same ploy was tried and failed in the 1970s and 1980s for the same reason.2
What to do?
Shamelessly, Mark Meckler and his legal operatives turned to Newspeak. Attorney Rob Natelson, the Newspeak guru of the convention lobby, announced in a speech on September 16, 2010, that he was “going to put our concepts on ‘reset'”:
“I hope this is the last time I’ll say [the words] ‘constitutional convention.’… I often have made the mistake of calling it that, but it is a serious mistake because it causes people to misunderstand what the convention is all about. The Constitution gives the convention a specific name – a convention for proposing amendments – and I think we should call it that or perhaps an Article V convention, an amendments convention,or aconvention of the states.”
Thereafter, they adopted the term “convention of the states,” defined it as a convention totally controlled by State Legislators, and claimed that a “convention of states” was the same as an “Article V convention,” and different from a “constitutional convention” or a “con-con.”
As Meckler spins the narrative:
“A constitutional [or plenipotentiary] convention has only been held once in the entire history of the country set in 1787…. they can draft a new constitution from scratch….
“[But] This is an ‘Article V Convention of States for proposing amendments.’… They do not have supreme authority. They do not have the authority to redraft the entire [Constitution]…. So, an ‘Article V Convention of States for proposing amendments’ is a convention that is limited by the instructions from the States as to what they can deal with.” 4Common Sense
In Oldspeak – i.e., the real world of English grammar and common sense – “constitutional convention” and “Article V convention” are synonymous. Any convention dealing with drafting or amending a constitution is a “constitutional convention.” Also, any convention provided for in a constitution is, by definition, a “constitutional convention.”
But in the Orwellian world of COS Newspeak, a “convention of the states” can’t run away, by definition!
That the Newspeak definition for “convention of the states” doesn’t exist in our founding documents doesn’t matter to the convention lobby. It serves to deceive legislators into thinking that an “Article V convention,” unlike a “constitutional convention,” can’t run away and secures legislators’ YES votes on con-con applications.
Recently in Michigan, 32 Representatives responded to a National Association of Gun Rights survey, saying they were opposed to an Article V Convention, most likely because they were concerned they would lose the Second Amendment at a con-con – a very real possibility. After being exposed to COS Newspeak, some of those same legislators decided they could simultaneously support COS legislation asking Congress to call a “convention of the states”!
“It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. ‘Reality control,’ they called it: in Newspeak, ‘doublethink'” – 1984, Part I, Chapter 3“Limit” in Newspeak means “expand,” as shown by amendments proposed by COS supporters. Our Constitution already limits the federal government to the enumerated powers. The amendments proposed by Mark Levin, Michael Farris, and the COS simulated convention would legalize powers the federal government has already usurped and strip States of existing powers and rights.
COS recently promoted itself as “the largest Article V grassroots organization…nationwide.” So, a “grassroots” organization in COS Newspeak is one bankrolled with millions of dollars from mega-billionaires! 5
“WAR IS PEACE; FREEDOM IS SLAVERY; IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” – 1984, party slogans.Another word trick in COS Newspeak would replace “Delegate” with “Commissioner.” A “delegate” is a representative who has power; but a “commissioner” is a person charged to manage some particular subject-matter and is controlled by his superiors. Accordingly, Meckler told Senators at a February 25, 2015, Nebraska committee hearing that they’ll direct their “commissioners” by text messaging during the convention because legally, commissioners are equivalent to hired insurance agents! 6
What COS Fails to Mention
COS operatives and their coterie of attorneys fail to mention that we have another founding document in addition to the Constitution. That document is the Declaration of Independence which preceded the Constitution.
“It would have been quite impossible to render [the Declaration of Independence] into Newspeak while keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to doing so would be…the single word CRIMETHINK.” – 1984,AppendixThe Declaration of Independence, paragraph 2, expresses our founding principles which are above the Constitution: that all men are created equal; that our Rights come from God; that the purpose of government is to secure those Rights; and that, if the government fails to secure our Rights, We the People have the Right “to alter or to abolish” our government and set up a new one.
The convention is the highest form of government, having more power than State Legislatures and Congress put together. So even though the Framers met in convention in 1787 “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation (AOC),” they had the inherent and legal right, as expressed by the Declaration of Independence, to write a new Constitution which created a new government. Moreover, they set a precedent by making the new Constitution easier to ratify than amendments to the AOC.
And with the words “We the People…,” they reaffirmed in our Constitution the founding principles written eleven years earlier. In fact, in Federalist 40, Madison justified writing the new Constitution, which was to replace the AOC, by citing the Declaration of Independence.7
Conclusion
Newspeak, invented by the convention lobby, is believed and repeated in State Capitols across America by too many Republican legislators who have set logic and truth aside to buy the false narrative. They believe that the solution to an overreaching federal government that has ignored our Constitution is to change our Constitution! And that an Article V convention called by Congress can’t possibly run away because it is just a “convention of the states” in Newspeak!
And shame on the heavily bankrolled, self-professed “conservatives” at COS, along with their team of attorneys, “constitutional scholars,” and lobbyists who risk our Constitution by selling a bill of goods to well-meaning and unsuspecting legislators. The same propaganda is used to fool ordinary citizens whom COS claims to “represent.”
A runaway convention can’t be prevented with Newspeak! Americans must educate themselves on this deception and be vigilant. Understand the real remedies our Framers said we must use to prevent federal overreach. Once a convention is called, it will be too late to stop a new Constitution with an easier mode of ratification from being imposed. Our existing Constitution and our Liberty hang in the balance.
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free…it expects what never was and never will be.” – Thomas Jefferson to C. Yancey, 1816
End Notes
1 See Judge Van Sickle’s Article, Part IV, https://publiushuldah.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/van-sickle03192017.pdf
2 “Constitutional Convention called Redux,” Part 4, Kelleigh Nelson 3-22-2013, para 9: https://freedomoutpost.com/constitutional-convention-call-redux-rexford-g-tugwell-the-newstates-constitution/
3The State-Application-and-Convention Method Of Amending The Constitution: The Founding Era Vision, Robert G. Natelson, See I (pp 9, 10).
4 Red Eye Radio, scroll to 7/6/17, Part 2 @ 51:25: http://www.redeyeradioshow.com/on-demand/
5 While we are unable to determine all the sources of the funding for Meckler’s group; the ultimate source of much of the funding for the push for an Article V convention is the Koch Brothers of Texas.
6Nebraska Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, 2-25-2015, Transcript pp. 47, 52:http://www.legislature.ne.gov/FloorDocs/104/PDF/Transcripts/Government/2015-02-25.pdf
7 http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fed40.htm, para 15
© Judi Caler
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
The Weekly Sam: The Whole Language Fraud and Dr. Seuss
Sam Blumenfeld was a critic of the Dr. Seuss books but not because of its alleged racist content but because the books were written for a look-say readers. Here is a newsletter from Sam exposing the whole language fraud:
http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/1989/BEL%2004-03%20198903.pdf
The Blumenfeld Archives
A BRIEF COMPARISON OF THE AMERICAN BILL OF RIGHTS WITH THE UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS by Tom Moor
On this day in 1789, congress proposed a firewall to contain the new powers of the Constitution. Contrary to popular understanding, The Bill of Rights is not addressed to the people. It is addressed from the people to their new government, telling it in no uncertain terms not to go beyond the named and specific powers that WE THE PEOPLE had just granted it (in the main body of the Constitution).
To further clarify this point, the Bill contains its own preamble: “in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its power… further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added.” The stringent language of those clauses further nails down their restrictive intent, using terms like: “Congress shall make no law,” “shall not be infringed,” and “shall not be violated.”
By comparison, in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, privileges are GRANTED by the globalist government to the people. Conspicuously absent are any restraints on UN power, including the right to protest the UN, the right to a jury, and the right to keep and bear arms. In fact, Article 29, section 3 explicitly states: “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” And this has been shown to be absolutely true over time, the long-term aim being the destruction of national sovereignty for the purposes of their tyrannical New World Order. I am very happy, even pleasantly shocked, to report that last week, our President, Donald J. Trump, gave a speech at the United Nations where he asserted, over and over, the American Constitution as our rule of law, as well as the concept of national sovereignty in general.
So reader, on this day ask yourself, where do my rights really come from? From a noble, yellowed parchment document? From the founders that wrote it? Or from God? And what have you done to keep those rights? To keep government within its named limits, to preserve your rights and those of your family, going forward in the great storm in time? These are some of the principles we teach to the next generation of patriots at Camp Constitution. Honoring the past… Teaching the Present… Preparing the future… Won’t you join us?
The Weekly Sam: Multiculturalism A Prescription for Moral Anarchy
Sam Blumenfeld wrote a monthly newsletter from 1986 to 1999. His first newsletter concerned multiculturalism. It is more relevant today that when it was first penned:
http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/1986/BEL%2001-01%20198609.pdf
The Blumenfeld Archives
CONSTITUTION DAY 2017 ON THE MEANING, PROMOTION AND DEFENSE OF “A MORE PERFECT UNION”
Eleven score and ten years ago, our fathers met for the second time, at the same great hall in Philadelphia––that same, hallowed hall where thirteen years earlier they had christened America with her great, guiding vision––a Declaration of who we were as a people, as well as an ideal of who we could be as an independent nation––that is, if we could survive.
To achieve this would require a great, united effort of states and people across the land, the physical and spiritual Union of America. The great patriot, Christopher Gadsden, of South Carolina (famed for the golden “Don’t tread on me,” flag) declared, courageously: “There ought to be no New England men, no New Yorker, &c., known on the Continent, but all of us Americans.” And we Americans did come together as one nation to finally attain our sovereignty, but could we keep that spirit alive? By 1787, our future was in doubt.
And so the founders gathered once again, not only as trustees of our hard-won independence, but also as representatives of thirteen very contentious states––states that like thirteen divided nations were (both internally and with each other) on the verge of civil war.
Their immediate purpose was to revise The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union––at a time when that Union was falling apart. Not surprisingly, the new Constitution, in its opening words, defined a much stronger union––a union not only of competing states, but of, by and for the American people, the preamble beginning, in big, bold capital letters for all to see, with “WE THE PEOPLE of the United States.” It was crystal clear from that point on who would be in charge of America and her destiny, and it would no longer be a loose confederation of states.
Anti-Federalists like Patrick Henry were alarmed: “Who authorized them to speak in the language of ‘We the people,’ instead of ‘We, the states?’ States are the characteristic and soul of a confederation. If the states be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great consolidated national government of the people of all the states.”
George Mason concurred, and added, “Whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a national government, and no longer a confederation.”
In reply, the Federalists did not disagree. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, of South Carolina, summed it up correctly, “This admirable manifesto sufficiently refutes the doctrine of the individual sovereignty and independence of the several states. The several states are not even mentioned by name or in any part, as if it was intended to impress the maxim on America that our freedom and independence arose from our union, and that without it, we never could be free or independent. Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this union by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distress.”
Washington, as commanding general, and in all his later travels as president, worked very deliberately to cultivate a feeling of Union among the troops and the people, as the model of what it means to be an American. In his farewell address, he made this a duty for all who would call themselves Americans: “The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness…”
President Trump, in his weekly address, commemorating 230 years of the Constitution, said, “They gave us an incredible gift, the vision of a sovereign and self-governing people to control their own affairs… The framers of our Constitution triumphantly declared to whom the government of the United States belonged. It was, “WE THE PEOPLE.”
Indeed, everything the new constitution set out to do (establish justice, secure the blessings of liberty, provide for the common defense, insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare)––all were done, according to The Preamble, “In order to form a more perfect union.” A union of, by, and for WE THE PEOPLE: to ourselves, and our posterity.
So what does this mean to the American of today? It means that each of us has a personal responsibility to see that our republic will not only survive, but continue to thrive as a great beacon, a shining “City on a Hill,” envisioned by John Winthrop in 1630 (his speech an early harbinger of American liberty, as was The Mayflower Compact).
It also means that WE THE PEOPLE are endowed with tremendous power, power vested in each of us not only by this great document, but ultimately by the divine grace and providence of our Creator God, yea the Power, Truth, and Love of Jesus Christ, whom we recognize as the true author and protector of our rights, to guide us in faithfully executing this awesome responsibility: the responsibility to see that our grand experiment is carried forward into the future against all odds, machinations and adversity––carried forward as one nation under God indivisible.
In order to do this we must be able to identify and distinguish threats to both our liberty and Union, and how they act and react in concert. It’s amazing how some of the very best conservatives and libertarians can only see threats to our liberties, while never considering the many threats to our Union: threats to our wholeness and oneness as Americans.
It is imperative that we be able to think from this angle. In order to fully comprehend and combat what is currently being thrown against us, we need that added stereoscopic perspective of the founders (to comprehend liberty and union together). It’s kind of like having night-vision goggles against a surprise attack in the dark. Yes, it is still possible to fight without it on the same level as the enemy, but why not be able not rise above and gain the initiative by being able to see clearly what, where, and how the attack is being staged?
The Union is our territory and people and our lawful, Constitutional government undivided and as one. So open borders, illegal immigration (counted in the tens of millions of people who will never learn our language, history, traditions, or constitution)––this onslaught, in concert with the globalist plan for a “North American Union,” (the very name of which seeks to subvert and replace our “More Perfect Union”) are threats to America as a people and a nation, and a strain on our limited resources.
It is also an assault on our common language, and all efforts to make us a multilingual Tower of Babel are aimed at destroying our Union (you can’t be united if you can’t speak to each other, which is why Quebec has always been at odds with Canada). A great cartoon depicts John Wayne on a cell phone demanding, “Why do I gotta press one for English?”
Sanctuary cities, UN global compact cities, any and all treachery of cities and states to secede from the Union, to have the country amputated and cut up like a side of beef, or to follow global color-of-law, including illegal environmental initiatives and bylaws created by UN Agenda 21 and ICLEA, are attacks on our liberty, property and territory, our state and constitutional law, and ultimately our union (as they divide us against each other, especially our brainwashed compatriots). On that note, for all who refer to our uninformed countrymen as “those people,” or “the sheeple,” have you ever tried to be the good shepherd and lead them? For this is the spirit of the Union.
Soros-funded, paid mercenaries like Antifa and Black Lives Matter have nothing to do with stopping fascism (like their own) or helping blacks achieve the American dream; but they have everything to do with Balkanization: of attacking and dividing our sacred Union at the level of our very identity: that we must (according to Washington) always think of ourselves first and foremost as Americans.
Our American spirit has always been guided, united and grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition: “One nation, under God, indivisible” ––God, above all, is the cornerstone of our Union, so all efforts in attacking public demonstrations of our faith go against the second clause of the First Amendment, “prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
The Mayor of Boston, in prohibiting the Christian flag from being flown (even for one day) above Boston City Hall Plaza, is attacking our union as believers, that faith being the very backbone of America (while at the same time, authorizing a great plague of flags which are an affront to American freedom and Christian morality).
Likewise, Obama’s policy of admitting hundreds of thousands whose faith is violently hostile to our own was a vicious attack on the very soul of our Union, one which continues to haunt us this day. As President Trump has declared, “Our nation endures because we have citizens who love America.” So if you truly hate our country, then what are you doing here?
In summary, a patriot can easily identify an attack on our Union by its “divide-and-conquer” nature. These attacks, if examined in depth, are seldom indigenous; in fact, they almost always originate from the same outside source: European banking acting through intelligence tentacles, secret societies and unelected councils placed in government, academia, global “free trade” corporations and the mainstream media who have all, from the beginning, sought divide and conquer us by keeping us at war with each other.
And so on this day, my brother and sister compatriot, have you done your part to make our Union more perfect? To teach and promote what it means to be a good American, to love each other in a Christian way, and to enforce our great constitution?
As President Trump declared in closing, “Let us pledge allegiance to our flag, devote our hearts to our country, and demonstrate our love for one another as Americans, and as the children of God.”
In that spirit, let us band together once again, all across the grand, majestic reaches of The Union, from sea to shining sea. Striding forward together in the cascade of years––against the crashing tide of the times.
These are some of the principles, the history and tools that we teach to posterity, to the next generation of American patriots every summer at Camp Constitution. “Honoring the past; teaching the present; preparing the future.”
Will you join us?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li4AlRLlp6Y
The Weekly Sam: Humanism’s Effect on Family Values
Sam Blumenfeld rightly condended that Humanism’s infleuence permeates our nation and our culture. This explains how a big city mayor can call himself a proud Catholic, but hold a worldview that is in sharp opposite to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Sam spoke and wrote about it frequently and contended that it was a man centered religion, and that folks like John Dewey believed that the government school classroom was the pulpit for the Humanist religion. Here is a link to a speech he gave on the subject from the 1980’s:
http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Transcripts/Humanism’s%20Effect%20On%20Family%20Values.pdf
Liberty Counsel Comes to Camp Constitution’s Side Over Flag Raising Denial
BOSTON, MA – Liberty Counsel has sent a demand letter to the City of Boston to approve a permit to raise the Christian flag on a Boston City Hall Plaza flagpole, next to the American flag, as part of a permitted cultural event sponsored by Camp Constitution. The event will celebrate the contributions of Christianity to American freedom and the rule of law, and will highlight the need for racial reconciliation through Christ. In addition to the flag raising on the steps of Boston City Hall Plaza, the event will include short presentations by clergy members from diverse national and ethnic backgrounds, and a brief history of Boston as “the city set on a hill.”
Camp Constitution’s Hal Shurtleff began the permitting process in July 2017 and offered the City several proposed dates in September. The City stonewalled, and the camp followed up multiple times, only to receive a written denial from the City on September 8:
“I am writing to you in response to your inquiry as to the reason for denying your request to raise the ‘Christian Flag.’ The City of Boston maintains a policy and practice of respectfully refraining from flying non-secular flags on the City Hall flagpoles… According to the above policy and practice, the City of Boston has respectfully denied the request of Camp Constitution to fly on a City Hall flagpole the “Christian” flag, as it is identified in the request, which displays a red Latin cross against a blue square bordered on three sides by a white field…The City would be willing to consider a request to fly a non-religious flag, should your organization elect to offer one” (Emphasis added).
This denial is unconstitutional. The City’s past and current practice (and permit application) provides that City Hall Plaza flagpoles are available for privately-selected flags to be flown upon request of virtually any private association or activity.
Numerous private organizations have raised flags related to their respective events. These events have included ethnic and other “cultural celebrations,” corresponding with the raising of the flags of various countries or causes, and announcements of the same on the CityHallPlazaBoston.com website. Approved flags flown at such events include those of Albania, Brazil, Ethiopia, Italy, Panama, Peru, Portugal, Puerto Rico, and Mexico, as well as of Communist China and Cuba. The flag of the private “Chinese Progressive Association” has been raised. The “Juneteenth” flag has been raised by the private National Juneteenth Observance Foundation. A homosexual rainbow flag has been raised by the private organization Boston Pride. Even a “transgender” pink and blue flag has been raised. Since these are all allowed, the City cannot deny Camp Constitution’s permit request to fly the Christian flag.
“Government officials cannot just cry ‘Establishment of Religion’ whenever Christians seek access to a public forum,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “The Free Exercise and the Free Speech Clauses also protect religious expression. There is a crucial difference between government endorsement of religion and private speech, which government is bound to respect. Private religious speech in a public forum where secular viewpoints are permitted does not violate the Constitution. Censoring religious viewpoints does violate the First Amendment. Where the City of Boston allows any other flag by numerous other private organizations, it may not ban the Christian flag as part of a privately-sponsored event,” said Staver.
Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.
Happy Birthday Uncle Sam
Today is the birthday of Uncle Sam Wilson who was born on this day in 1766 in the town of Arlington, MA. As a boy, he witnessed Paul Revere’s famous Midnight Ride and served as a courrier for the Committees of Safety. He and his family moved to Mason, NH where Sam spent his boyhood years. At the age of 22, Sam along with his older brother, Ebeneezer walked to Troy, NY to seek their fame and fortune. Sam started a brick making factory and a meat packing business. During the War of 1812, he had a contract to supply meat for the military. He marked his meat barrels with the initials U.S. and the rest is history.
Campers and staff have visited the Uncle Sam House in Mason, NH. Here is a link to the video “A Walk Through the Uncle Sam House