THE FOUNDATION: ARMS

“The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.” —Noah Webster

THE GIPPER

“The gun has been called the great equalizer, meaning that a small person with a gun is equal to a large person, but it is a great equalizer in another way, too. It insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed. When the British forgot that they got a revolution. And, as a result, we Americans got a Constitution; a Constitution that, as those who wrote it were determined, would keep men free. If we give up part of that Constitution we give up part of our freedom and increase the chance that we will lose it all. I am not ready to take that risk. I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive.” —Ronald Reagan

SELECT READER COMMENTS

(Our servers automatically delete “Reply” messages to this e-mail. To submit or to view reader comments visit our Reader Comments page. Join the debate at the Patriot Blog.)

“How right you are about guns not being the problem with ‘gun violence’! Our ‘living Constitution’ advocates have given the criminals more freedom than we who abide by the laws! Why don’t they see that criminals never obey gun-control laws, therefore making those who do obey sitting ducks? The criminals get the illegal weapons with which to commit crime, yet we have trouble purchasing those that are legal. I think that the lunatics are running the asylum.” —Fairview, Pennsylvania

“Thank you for the pinhole/wide-angle lens analogy in ‘The right of the people to keep and bear arms’ regarding how the courts view the 1st and 2nd Amendments. Have you also noted how Jefferson’s ‘wall of separation’ is widely cited in the church-state debate, but he is never cited in the right to bear arms debate?” —Grovetown, Georgia

Editor’s Reply: Yes, and have you noted that most people who cite Jefferson when referring to the so-called “wall of separation,” have NO idea what they are talking about, or what Jefferson was talking about!

“I don’t question the validity of praising Fred Thompson for being the first major candidate to present a feasible plan for fixing Social Security, but your seemingly unqualified support for him and belief that he should be the next Republican Party presidential nominee is, at best, confusing.” —Colorado Springs, Colorado

Editor’s Reply: “Unqualified support?” We give the highest ranking to Thompson because, as noted in our 2008 Presidential Candidate Profiles, when taking into account all the qualifications necessary for a successful presidency—record, experience, capability, character, qualifications and, of course, their ability to read and understand our Constitution as it was written, Thompson comes out on top. Do we agree with every thing he supports or does not support—no… nor is that true with any other candidate. In fact, if the only criterion was “constitutional constructionism” Ron Paul would come out on top. But Thompson stands head and shoulders above the other candidates when it comes to overall qualifications.

“If I was allowed to receive only one email message a day I would choose The Patriot Post. It is the only consistently truthful and constitutionally supportive message on the Internet. I have a grandson in the marines, who just returned from Iraq a couple weeks ago, so I and my family are eternally grateful for the support you give to the military members who serve our great country and doing their best to keep it free, even for the nut cases who are trying to destroy it. Thank you and God bless you for all that you do.” —Excelsior, Minnesota

LEGACY OF THE REAGAN REVOLUTION

Howard Baker, Ronald Reagan’s White House Chief of Staff, comments on The Patriot Post: “Thank you for your confidence in, and efforts to sustain the Reagan legacy.”

As you know, The Patriot is not sustained by any political, special-interest or parent organization. Nor do we accept any online or e-mail advertising. Our operations and mission are funded by—and depend entirely upon—the voluntary financial support of American Patriots like YOU!

At latest accounting, we still must raise $272,433 before year-end.

The Patriot Post is distributed without a subscription fee so that thousands of our military, collegiate and mission-field readers can receive The Patriot at no charge.

If you have not already done so, please take a moment to support The Patriot’s 2007 Annual Fund today with a secure online donation—however large or small. Every dollar you contribute provides a free subscription for someone serving our nation, or a young person who will fill a family, community and national leadership role in the next generation!

If you prefer to support The Patriot by mail, please use our Donor Support Form.

I thank you for the honor and privilege of serving you as editor and publisher of The Patriot. On behalf of your Patriot staff and National Advisory Committee, thank you and God bless you and your family!

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander Publisher

FAMILY

“African-Americans are much less likely than their parents were (or than white adults are now) to be married. They are also more likely to have children outside of marriage than their parents were, or than white adults are today. When 25 percent of children in a community are born outside of marriage (as among whites today) that’s a serious problem. When almost 70 percent of children in a given community are born outside of marriage (as among African-Americans today) that’s a tsunami blocking the intergenerational accumulation of human and social capital. So far, the silence about the issue among our leaders is deafening.” —Maggie Gallagher

CULTURE

“Television was once viewed as a welcome guest in the home. Programmers were to behave as any guest, not soiling the carpet or breaking furniture, controlling their children and demonstrating sensibilities that would not offend their hosts. No more. Today’s television programs behave like uninvited guests who stay too long, eat all the food, drink too much and throw up on the new rug. Most people could live without TV if they tried. The Writers Guild strike gives them that chance. Take a walk with your daughter. Have a conversation with your wife, your husband. Eat dinner together as a family without the distraction of the television set. Read a book and immerse yourself in fictional characters or real history. Instead of being spoon-fed irrelevancies and meaningless chatter, exercise your mind. You will quickly form new, more pleasant habits that will leave you with better feelings than does TV’s corrupt fare from which more of us should flee.” —Cal Thomas

LIBERTY

“Compared to Pakistan, imposing democracy in Iraq is like imposing democracy in Darien, Conn. But in Iraq, liberals prefer an anti-American dictator, like Saddam Hussein. Only in Pakistan do liberals yearn for pure democracy. You wouldn’t know it to read the headlines, but Musharraf has not staged a military coup. In fact, he was re-elected easily just weeks ago under Pakistan’s own parliamentary system. But the Pakistani Supreme Court, like our own Supreme Court, believes it is above the president and refused to acknowledge Musharraf’s election on the grounds that he is disqualified because he is still wearing a military uniform. That’s when Musharraf sent them home. Musharraf’s election was certainly more legitimate than that of Syrian president Bashar Assad (with whom every leading Democrat has had a photo-op) or Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (adjunct professor at Columbia University) or Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez (loon)… Pakistan is a country where local Islamic courts order women to be raped as punishment for the crimes of their male relatives. Among the Islamists’ bill of particulars against Musharraf is the fact that he has promoted the Women’s Protection Bill, which would punish rape, rather than using it as a device for social control. Pakistan doesn’t need Adlai Stevenson right now. It needs Mustafa Kemal Ataturk to impose military rule and drag a country of Islamic savages into the 19th century, as Ataturk did in Turkey. Pakistan’s Ataturk is Gen. Musharraf. To try to force democracy on the differing ‘I hate America’ factions in Pakistan at this stage would be worse than Jimmy Carter’s abandonment of the Shah in 1979. It would result in what former assistant secretary of state Edward Djerejian called: ‘one man, one vote, one time’.” —Ann Coulter

GOVERNMENT

“As coercive monopolies that spend other people’s money taken by force, governments are uniquely unqualified to solve problems. They are riddled by ignorance, perverse incentives, incompetence and self-serving. The synthetic-fuels program during the Carter years consumed billions of dollars and was finally disbanded as a failure. The push for ethanol today is more driven by special interests than good sense—it’s boosting food prices while producing a fuel of dubious environmental quality. Even if the climate really needs cooling down, government can’t be counted on to accomplish that.” —John Stossel

RE: THE LEFT

“’The question is, should we be giving an extra $120 billion to people in the top 1 percent?’ So asked Gene Sperling, Hillary Clinton’s chief economic advisor, at a recent National Press Club panel discussion. Translation: It’s the government’s money, and anything left over after Uncle Sam picks your pockets is a ‘gift.’ Indeed, to hear leading Democrats talk about the ‘richest 1 percent’ —a diverse cohort of investors, managers, entrepreneurs and, to be sure, some fat-cat heirs—one gets the impression that wealthy Americans are a natural resource, to be pumped for as much cash as we need. Further, the Democrats don’t think that well will ever run dry… According to Democrats, it’s greedy to want to keep your own money, but it’s ‘justice’ to demand someone else’s… Meanwhile, Democrats keep telling the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers that America’s problems would be solved if only the rich people would pay ‘their fair share’ of income taxes. Not only is this patently untrue and a siren song toward a welfare state, it amounts to covetousness as fiscal policy.” —Jonah Goldberg

POLITICAL FUTURES

“The choices for America have never been clearer. On almost every issue, Democrats and the left are promoting more government ownership and control, pushing America closer to a welfare state. All of the Democratic presidential hopefuls are running on a decidedly collectivist and socialistic leaning platform. The Democrats want socialized medicine and more federal control of our schools. They are committed to raising taxes and expanding federal government programs. They will increase the burden of regulations and taxes on the American people, cost American jobs, and reduce America’s competitiveness around the world. Democrats will once again weaken our nation’s defenses and intelligence systems, while continuing to hold Americans hostage to foreign oil. They will seek citizenship, government benefits, and voting rights for illegal aliens. And Democrats will appoint liberal judges who will replace America’s traditional values with government’s directionless secular views.” —Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ)

FOR THE RECORD

“[M]any who repeat the ‘giving back’ mantra would sneer at any such notion as patriotism or any idea that the institutions and values of American society have accomplished worthy things and deserve their support, instead of their undermining. Our educational system, from the schools to the universities, are actively undermining any sense of loyalty to the traditions, institutions and values of American society. They are not giving back anything except condemnation, often depicting sins common to the human race around the world as peculiar evils of ‘our society.’ A classic example is slavery, which is repeatedly drummed into our heads—in the schools and in the media—as something unique done by white people to black people in the United States. The tragic fact is that, for thousands of years of recorded history, people of every race and color have been both slaves and enslavers. The Europeans enslaved on the Barbary Coast of North Africa alone were far more numerous than all the Africans brought to the United States and to the 13 colonies from which it was formed. What was unique about Western civilization was that it was the first civilization to turn against slavery, and that it stamped out slavery not only in its own societies but in other societies around the world during the era of Western imperialism. That process took well over a century, because non-Western societies resisted… Those who want to ‘give back’ should give back the truth. It is a debt that is long overdue.” —Thomas Sowell

OPINION IN BRIEF

“The mainstream media have been in a breathless tizzy about how Hillary Clinton waffled, tripped, stumbled or generally screwed up at the Democratic debate in Philadelphia two weeks ago. But Hillary’s performance at prior debates was never as deft or ‘flawless’ as the media claimed in the first place. Conventional wisdom has now flipped, and the air-headed lemmings of our free press have turned on a dime and are stampeding in the opposite direction… Hillary’s stonewalling evasions and mercurial, soulless self-positionings have been going on since her first run for the U.S. Senate from New York, a state she had never lived in and knew virtually nothing about. The liberal Northeastern media were criminally complicit in enabling her queen-like, content-free ‘listening tour,’ where she took no hard questions and where her staff and security people (including her government-supplied Secret Service detail) staged events stocked with vetted sympathizers, and where they ensured that no protesters would ever come within camera range. That compulsive micromanagement, ultimately emanating from Hillary herself, has come back to haunt her in her dismaying inability to field complex unscripted questions in a public forum. The presidential sweepstakes are too harsh an arena for tenderfoot novices. Hillary’s much-vaunted ‘experience’ has evidently not extended to the dynamic give-and-take of authentic debate.” —liberal columnist Camille Paglia

THE LAST WORD

“What does a woman running for president really want? Does she want to be measured solely by her skills as a leader and debater or does she want our sympathy every time things go wrong? Does she want to win because her ideas and vision offer the best solutions for America or does she hope to make her way to the presidency by stoking the emotions and ire of her female supporters? Does she want America to be a truly progressive place—so progressive that a candidate’s sex has no relevance and isn’t even mentioned?—or does she want to yank out the wounded-female card every time it works to her advantage? It’s no wonder why men are so perplexed by Hillary. A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll found that half of all men—and 55 percent of married men—would never vote for her… I wish Hillary would ditch the touchy-feely stuff and be more logical. I wish she would more clearly define her ideas. Then men wouldn’t vote against her because they are bewildered. They’ll vote against her because her big-government ideas are the exact wrong direction for America. But I fear Hillary won’t stop pulling out the female card. If she makes it to the presidency, perhaps she can use it to her advantage. If a rogue dictator threatens to attack us, she can build a giant pair of bifocals that spans all 50 states and say, ‘You wouldn’t fight a country with glasses, would you?’ If Ahmadinejad doesn’t give up his nuclear ambitions, she can build a lamp the size of Maine and threaten to throw it at him. If Al Qaeda threatens to strike, she can stall them by saying, ‘Not tonight, Osama, I have a headache’.” —Tom Purcell

Veritas vos Liberabit—Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot’s editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families—especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)