Endowed or Entitled – Your Choice

by Peg Luksik

medium_luksikOnce upon a time there were two brothers. The older would, by birthright, inherit all that his father owned. A day came when the older wanted something to eat. He had been outside all day, and was hungry. The younger had a meal already prepared. The older asked the younger to give him the dinner. The younger agreed, on the condition that the older would give up his birthright in return for the free meal. The older took the deal, gave up his birthright, and ate.

Most of us recognize the story. And we scratch our heads at a person who would give away an entire birthright for one meal.

We shouldn’t. We are just like him.

America was founded on the recognition that each of us has a birthright of endowed and unalienable rights. Like all birthrights, it brings the promise of opportunity and blessing, provided that we honor the responsibility of protecting and cherishing it. Our birthright cannot legitimately be taken from any of us, but each of us can choose to give it away. If enough of us make that choice, the birthright’s promise will be lost to all of us.

Sadly, many Americans are making that choice. They are selling their birthright of endowed rights for the free meal of government entitlements. And like the older brother in the story, they are convincing themselves that their immediate needs are so important that meeting them is worth what they are losing.

They may not even realize that they are selling one thing to get another. But they are.

It is not a coincidence that as the number of government entitlements increases, there is an equal increase in government’s assault on our endowed rights. The government is slowly changing its own job description from a protector of endowed rights to a grantor of entitlements. If it completes the transition, it will also have changed its status from a servant to a master of America’s citizens.

Let’s look at just one example. The government is marketing an entitlement to health care. Accepting it means allowing the government  to determine who may receive what treatment at what cost under what conditions, effectively selling the endowed right of life. And, since the law creating the entitlement says the government’s power to make those treatment determinations is not limited to the individuals who have accepted the entitlement, the loss of the endowed right is more universal than the entitlement it has been traded for. Every American will be affected by the fact that some Americans have decided to sell their birthright.

The younger brother understood the value of the birthright, and he was willing to give something to get it. He understood that the meal would quickly end, while the birthright would last forever. His elder freely chose immediate satisfaction over long-term blessing.

Today’s government also understands the value of our birthright. To get us to trade it away, that government has created a whole system of enticements, hoping that we will act like the older brother -focus only on the meal and forget what we are selling. So far, the tactic is proving to be successful.

The reality is, we can either be endowed, or we can be entitled. An America where endowed rights are cherished will be free and prosperous forever, while an America full of entitlements will last about as long as the older brother’s meal. We all know what we think about that older brother. The question is, what do we want our children to think when they remember us?

Peg Lutsik is a wife, mom, principled thinker, debater extraordinaire, and two-time Constitution Party candidate for Pennsylvania governor! A staunch pro-life leader, she authors the Internet blog, From the Kitchen Table, and is the founder of the Center for American Heritage. Please take time to visit her website, http://www.centerforamericanheritage.com . Peg has graciously given us permission to reprint her blog posts.

We Don’t Need Another George W. Bush

by Chuck Baldwin – Constitution Party 2008 Presidential Candidate

chuck-baldwinLast Saturday, Texas Governor Rick Perry unofficially launched his 2012 Presidential candidacy in Houston (in my opinion). Speculation is he will officially announce his intentions this weekend in South Carolina. If he does declare his candidacy, many election-watchers say Perry will become the GOP frontrunner, due to an extremely weak field of declared candidates. If Perry does declare his candidacy, everyone will know that the Houston event was staged for the purpose of launching his Presidential bid, rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
If Perry declares his candidacy (and I’m confident he will), people should also realize that the Houston event was a precursor to the type of campaign that Perry will use throughout the Republican primary season. As a fellow Texan, it was not lost on Rick Perry how George W. Bush obtained the Republican nomination–and eventually the White House. In short, Rick Perry is going to use the G.W. Bush model to win a Presidential election.
Think about it: G.W. Bush won the White House after an extremely unpopular liberal Democrat had been President. Barack Obama’s popularity is even lower than Bill Clinton’s was–and Clinton was only the second President in US history to ever be impeached! Bush’s campaign boss, Karl Rove, brilliantly painted G.W. Bush as being a wholesome “born again Christian,” which played very well with a Christian electorate that was tired of being embarrassed by a lying, philandering reprobate living in the White House.
In 2012, the American electorate, especially the Christian electorate, is totally fed up with an incumbent President whom everyone knows to be extremely sympathetic to Muslim and Marxist ideologies. Plus, a sizeable percentage of the American people truly suspect that Obama was NOT born in the United States and is, therefore, not even qualified to be President. This is the stage upon which Rick Perry appears. It is a stage very similar to the one George W. Bush stepped onto in 2000. And just as Bush played the “born again Christian” card to the max in the 2000 Presidential campaign, so Rick Perry appears to be ready to do in 2012. That is what the Houston event was all about last Saturday.
Billed as “A Day of Prayer and Fasting,” the event solidified Perry’s preferred status among evangelical Christians. With the help of the American Family Association (which reportedly contributed up to a million dollars to the event), James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, and Cornerstone Church’s (San Antonio) Pastor John Hagee, Perry is all but assured of cornering the “born again” vote, just as G.W. Bush did in 2000.
One would like to think that America’s Christians learned something from the two GWB administrations, but it doesn’t appear that they have. I think it is safe to say that Dobson, Hagee, et al, would endorse ANYONE nominated by the Republican Party. They have already proven that, have they not? James Dobson went so far as to humiliate himself by endorsing big government John McCain in the 2008 general elections, even after vowing publicly that he would “NEVER” support McCain. During the primaries, however, the Republican candidate who can “talk the Bible” the best can expect the support of these clueless evangelical leaders. And this time around, it appears that Rick Perry is that man. You can rest assured if Perry doesn’t win the nomination, Dobson and Hagee will be right there for whoever does.

For the record, I invite anyone out there who still labors under the delusion that George W. Bush presided over some kind of “born again” Christian administration to check out the vast amounts of information I have compiled on my web site that exposes Bush as being just another big government elitist, who did as much (or more) to strip America of its God-given liberties as any other President in history. See the record here.
Furthermore, even cursory research will uncover the fact that the Bush and Clinton families have long collaborated together in criminal activity on a massive scale–activity that, in all likelihood, continues to this very day. (I still say, don’t be surprised if Obama dumps Joe Biden as his Vice President and puts Hillary Clinton on the ticket before next year’s elections.)
Of course, G.W. Bush was never held accountable by evangelical Christian voters for his unconstitutional conduct. All they cared about was Bush’s Christian rhetoric. And it does appear that is all they care about today. As a result, Rick Perry will prove to be a formidable candidate in the GOP primaries.

I have said over and over again that I would rather vote for an unbeliever who would preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, than vote for a believer who would NOT preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States! The pious rhetoric of political candidates means nothing!
If I hire a plumber to fix a drainage problem at my house, I am not interested so much in where he goes to church, or whether he teaches Sunday School, or what denomination he claims. I am hiring him to fix my plumbing! We sign a contract, he and I. I promise to pay him “X” amount of dollars, and he promises that when he’s finished, my toilets will flush. Christian or not, I expect him to honor the terms of his contract.
Ladies and gentlemen, when we elect a civil magistrate (at any level), we are entering into a contract with the one we elected. We gave them our support, which allowed them to obtain public office, and they promise (before Almighty God) to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. They do not promise to be “good Christians.” They do not promise to be “good Republicans.” They do not promise to be “good conservatives.” They take an oath before God (they sign a contract with the American people) to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. And it is our job as citizens to hold our civil magistrates to their oath! In fact, if any elected office holder were a TRUE Christian, he or she would take their oath even more seriously, would they not?
Instead of being excited about a candidate claiming to be a Christian, or claiming to pray and read his or her Bible, we need to get excited about a candidate who is serious about preserving the liberties of the American people, and who makes a commitment to protect and preserve the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and US Constitution!
Before we talk about Rick Perry’s commitment to prayer and fasting, let’s find out if Rick Perry believes that there must be a Declaration of War before America begins invading, bombing, and occupying foreign countries. Let’s find out if he believes he has the authority as President to use US military forces against American citizens. Let’s find out if he believes he has the authority to give billions and trillions of dollars away to foreign countries. Let’s find out if he plans to commit US military forces to the whims of the United Nations Security Council. Let’s find out if he supports the Military Commissions Act. Let’s find out if he supports the Patriot Act. Let’s find out if he believes the US government has the authority to use super-computers and advanced technology to continue to turn the United States into a giant surveillance-society. Let’s find out how serious he is about closing that southern border: speaking of which, what did Rick Perry do as governor of the border State of Texas to stop illegal immigration? And while we are on the subject of Border States, what did Rick Perry do to stop the NAFTA superhighway? Before we get excited about Rick Perry being a “good Christian,” let’s find out if he supports the Council of Governors, or the North American Union, or the Continuity of Government, or Agenda 21. Let’s find out if Perry will launch a Justice Department investigation into the ATF’s (under Barack Obama and Eric Holder) clandestine operation of providing firearms to Mexican drug gangs. We could go on and on with these kinds of questions.
The sad truth is, our illustrious evangelical leaders on the right are just as culpable in the dismantling and deterioration of the American republic as are those on the political or religious left! Both sides are willing to give their favored politicos a pass on constitutional governance. And ladies and gentlemen, that is why it hasn’t mattered to a tinker’s dam whether a Democrat or Republican, “liberal” or “conservative” is in the White House! And that’s why it won’t matter in 2012.
Besides, if James Dobson and John Hagee were truly interested in protecting and preserving the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and US Constitution, they would be promoting the candidacy of Ron Paul. But, unfortunately, they wouldn’t do it in 2008, and they won’t do it in 2012. They lack both the courage and the sagacity.

We don’t need another George W. Bush in the White House. For that matter, we don’t need another Jimmy Carter in the White House. What we need is a President (governor, mayor, sheriff, etc.) who will preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States!


Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana.

The United States Should Withdraw From the International Monetary Fund

by Darrell Castle – Vice-Chairman Constitution Party National Committee

dscn0519Currently headquartered in Washington DC, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was formed in 1944 and finalized in 1945 as part of the Bretton Woods agreement made by the victorious Allied Powers at the end of WWII.

The IMF’s stated purposes are as follows:

  • To promote exchange rate stability;
  • To facilitate and manage the growth and balance of international trade;
  • To provide resources to member countries experiencing balance of payments problems;
  • To help maintain a multilateral system of payments;
  • And finally, to promote international monetary cooperation.

Despite its stated purposes, many people believe that the real purpose of the IMF is to bring poorer, less-industrialized countries into the orbit of global government and multinational corporations.

According to John Perkins in his book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, third world countries have been threatened with CIA destabilization and regime change unless they accept IMF loans. The loans are made with draconian repayment provisions like cutting social services, renegotiating union contracts and privatizing public services, which then allow foreign multinational corporations access to the country’s resources. Since these target countries often have their credit ratings downgraded, the loans also carry a very high interest rate.

Who funds the IMF or where does the “fund” in the IMF come from?

There are currently 187 IMF members, but the G-20 countries, meaning the top 20 economies, fund 71.21% of its revenue and the other 166 countries fund the other 28.79%. The United States share is 17.09% of the total. And Japan is second with 6.12%. Major decisions require an 85% super-majority to pass, and that makes the United States the only country that can block a super-majority on its own, because votes are commensurate with percentage of participation. The United States’ 17.09% allows it final veto over any major decision.

As most people know by now, the current head of the IMF – current at least until his recent resignation – French politician Dominique Strauss-Kahn, was placed in a New York City jail after being charged with sexually assaulting a maid at his $3000 a night suite in the Midtown Manhattan Sofitel. Could DSK, as he is affectionately known by his friends, make do with a $600-per-night room at the Ritz? No way, nothing but the best will do for the head of the IMF and the most likely candidate to replace Nicholas Sarkozy as President of France.

The maid who has accused DSK of rape is a West African immigrant with a 15-year-old daughter. Perhaps DSK reasoned that since the IMF has been raping her former continent for decades, what difference could one more rape make?

This sordid mess is made worse by the fact that the IMF, like most of its member states, usually runs a negative balance sheet, leaving in doubt which party will pay for the damage. In 2009, the IMF sold 200 tons of gold to close a deficit in the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars. Who will pay for DSK’s latest (alleged) debauchery besides himself?

Who will pay for DSK’s legal defense? The IMF has announced that it will sell some gold to cover that. The maid has a lawyer in addition to the NYC prosecutor’s office. I trust it will also sell enough gold to cover the several million that a NYC jury is likely to eventually award his victim.

The taxpayers of the United States should not be on the hook for one penny of his defense, damages, or even his $3000 per night hotel suite. In fact, if the political leadership of the United States had an ounce of decency left, it would announce the immediate withdrawal of the United States from the IMF. Tragically, they do not and thus will not.

Protecting Citizens’ Privacy Resolution

by the Constitution Party National Committee – March 2002 – Charleston, South Carolina

Whereas, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated…but upon probable cause…” and

Whereas, the Federal government’s collection, compiling, and abuse of databases to snoop on law-abiding citizens is rapidly expanding. This includes monitoring law-abiding citizens’ bank deposits, cell phone usage, e-mail, air travel, school children, lawful gun purchases, health care, medical records, immunizations, fingerprints, DNA, and genetic tests. Most often, these databases are built using the Social Security number, and

Whereas, there are renewed attempts by the Federal government, especially since 9/11, to impose a Federal ID on all citizens requiring States to have social security numbers on Drivers’ Licenses. The federal government often accomplishes the establishment of a database through mandates and grants to the State, and

Whereas, corporations are also involved in the collection and selling of personal data without consent. The Social Security Act stipulates that the social security number is never to be used for identification purposes. Therefore let it be

Resolved, that the Constitution Party supports the protection of a citizen’s privacy rights and opposes the use of the social security number for identification purposes and any attempt to create and impose a national ID.

State Model Emergency Health Powers Act Resolution

by the Constitution Party National Committee – March 2002 – Charleston, South Carolina

Whereas, the Bush administration and the Federal government are promoting the Model Emergency Health Powers Act (MEHPA) for enactment by the fifty states, which completely eliminates the safeguard of separation of powers and checks and balances. The MEHPA makes the governor a dictator, taking all powers of government including legislative, executive, and judicial, and

Whereas, the MEHPA only allows the State Legislature to take action by a super majority vote sixty days after the governor declares a health emergency, and

Whereas, the Legislature can only take action “upon finding that the occurrence of an illness or health condition that caused the emergency does not or no longer poses” a threat, which is extremely limiting, and

Whereas, under MEHPA state and local health officers, along with Governors, are granted dictatorial levels of power with no appeals process to remedy their unilateral decisions to force people to receive medical treatment, vaccines, be isolated, quarantined; otherwise to be charged with a misdemeanor and possibly end up in jail, and

Whereas, the MEHPA provides no religious or conscientious objections to medical treatment and vaccines, and

Whereas, in MEHPA there is no recognition of parent’s rights and responsibilities with regard to their children. This is important when you consider that people possibly might be quarantined separately from their children, and

Whereas, the MEHPA allows government to confiscate private property including food, fuel and clothing, and if so, without just compensation, and

Whereas, alternative health options are completely left out of the MEHPA. There should be recognition that alternatives to standard medical treatments and vaccines, etc., are available, often highly effective and far less dangerous, and

Whereas, the MEHPA provides for the collection of personal medical information, DNA, tests, etc., the privacy of which is not protected. MEHPA provides that the information will be turned over to the Federal government and used for research and end up in state and federal databases. This is a serious breach of our Fourth Amendment search, seizure, and privacy rights. Therefore, let it be

Resolved, that the Constitution Party opposes all versions of the State Model Emergency Health Powers Act.

Center for Disease Control Assault on Gun Rights Resolution

 by the Constitution Party National Committee – March 2002 – Charleston, South Carolina

Whereas, there is a new threat to gun rights that is now being pushed through state legislatures called the 2001 “National Strategy for Suicide Prevention” (NSSP) by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Surgeon General, and the Center for Disease Control, and

Whereas, this initiative is traceable to the 1993 United Nations World Health Organization Conference, and

Whereas, Goal Five of the NSSP, “Promote Efforts to Reduce Access to Lethal Means and Methods of Self-Harm,” states “If intervention is not possible when an individual is in a state of psychological pain, a self-destructive act may be prevented by limiting the individual’s access to the means or methods of self-harm…it may connote redesigning or altering the existing lethal means of self-harm currently available, and to others eliminating or limiting their availability…” and

Whereas, the report says that 57% of suicides are committed with guns, and “between 45-50 percent of all U.S. households have a firearm inside the home…” and

Whereas, Objective 5.2 of the NSSP states “By 2005, expose a proportion of households to public information campaign(s) designed to reduce the accessibility of lethal means, including firearms in the home”. Therefore be it

Resolved, that the Constitution Party recognizes this new threat to constitutionally protected gun rights and that the Constitution Party opposes any and all infringements of the God-given right to keep and bear arms.