I would like to be a guest on as many radio shows as possible in the next 30 to 60 days in an effort to enlighten the American people on a plan to restore our Constitutional Republic. I don't consider myself to be a Constitutional Scholar as much as I consider myself to be a perpetual student of the Constitution. I am particularly interested in discussing the role of the Constitution Club in the uniting the liberty minded individuals in each of the over 3,000 counties in America. Individually, we are weak, but together we can move mountains.

Please call me at (951) 282-3271 or email me at keithbroaders@gmail.com if you would like to have me as a guest on your show. Please forward this information to anyone that you know that hosts a show that has an audience of liberty minded individuals.

Sincerely,

Keith Broaders

Views: 138

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

"Individually, we are weak, but together we can move mountains."

Keith, I must take exception to this quote.  It is my understanding that the Constitution was written for the "rugged individualist" who will not be controlled by the British, Legislators, Executives, or any other group that would challenge individual freedom.

The Judicial Power of the Constitution gives every individual the Authority to protect their own right without the will of the majority.  As individuals, we have the power of government.  The separation of power is the greatest thing that has ever been devised for individual freedom.  This was just reiterated by the supreme court in Bond v U.S.  (2011).

One ant can not eat an elephant, but an army of ants can do it in a few minutes. The enemy that has us bound will not retreat unless they are forced to do so by a people united against them.

The Constitution was written to control the government and prevent it from abusing the rights of the people. You are correct that the framers of the Constitution knew that only a moral and enlightened people would have the capacity to live free and independent. Unfortunately, today we as a people we are neither virtuous or well informed.

To me the point is not to eat the elephant, but for all the ants to get filled up themselves.  It might take 20 elephants to supply the army of ants or it might take 40, but the point is each individual ant needs to be filled up, not all the elephants need to be eaten.

I don't think you're giving the individual enough credit to get what he deserves.  The group, even if they get what they all think they want, might still attempt to control the individual in some manner.

In my opinion we will never live free until we can put the bankers and the financial elite in their place. The government that was created to protect our lives, liberty and property rights has climbed in bed with the enemy.

The bankers have become the masters and the government officials are merely their agents that masquerade as public servants. To defeat the enemy that is lurking in the shadows it is going to take the collective efforts of millions of freedom loving Americans. Benjamin Franklin said long ago that "We must hang together or we most assuredly will hang separately."

I doubt there are millions of freedom loving Americans.  

The bankers may have taken over the federal government and their minions but they cannot take away my freedom if I avoid their currency to my advantage.  

Second to the money itself, "Voting" is the next biggest hoax.  Your vote does not count, never did, and never will!  When one votes, they are giving their power away, over to the one they voted for, or to the one they didn't vote for.  What is the purpose of voting other than to give away power?

I don't drive, don't have income, don't use federal reserve notes for money, don't cultivate, manufacture, or use any controlled substances....  I'm feeling pretty free, just looking to share with others how to do it. (eat my share of the elephant).

Dear Online Professor, Professor? Ok, I'll bite, but if you're a professor then you know that its "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not property rights. Also, if you use neither you must follow with NOR not or, as in neither virtuous NOR well informed. In addition, if you're going to quote someone, get it right. I believe the quote is "We must STAND together or we will most assuredly hang separately.

Morton, 

The principles written by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence were ideas that he borrowed from John Locke which included property and not the pursuit of happiness. In fact in his original draft Jefferson listed life, liberty and property, but his words were vetoed by the other members of the committee to draft the Declaration. It is likely that the issue of slavery and the fact that slaves were considered property at that time that the founders decided to avoid listing property as one of our primary unalienable rights. 

The product of one's life and his liberty is what enables a man to create property. Property is the fruits of one's labor and the founders believed that the fruits of a man's labor or his property that he created was his and his alone. In other words the right to create property by using his time and talent was one of the gifts granted to us by our Creator.

The Declaration of Independence indicated that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. How can a man pursue happiness if other people or his government can take his property without his consent? You are correct that property is not specifically mentioned in the Declaration but, their intent was clear that property was an unalienable right.

Thank you for posting you comment. I hope that I have successfully explained my position.

Where did I use the terms neither with or? I will make the correction if you tell me where I posted the error. Thank you for pointing out my mistake.

Online Professor said:

Morton, 

The principles written by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence were ideas that he borrowed from John Locke which included property and not the pursuit of happiness. In fact in his original draft Jefferson listed life, liberty and property, but his words were vetoed by the other members of the committee to draft the Declaration. It is likely that the issue of slavery and the fact that slaves were considered property at that time that the founders decided to avoid listing property as one of our primary unalienable rights. 

The product of one's life and his liberty is what enables a man to create property. Property is the fruits of one's labor and the founders believed that the fruits of a man's labor or his property that he created was his and his alone. In other words the right to create property by using his time and talent was one of the gifts granted to us by our Creator.

The Declaration of Independence indicated that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. How can a man pursue happiness if other people or his government can take his property without his consent? You are correct that property is not specifically mentioned in the Declaration but, their intent was clear that property was an unalienable right.

Thank you for posting you comment. I hope that I have successfully explained my position.

Dear Professor,

Jefferson's writings were inspired from the writings of more than one person, not just John Locke. He did  write most of the ideas himself in his style, but he also had trouble with the word property not being all-encompassing enough. My point was accurate. The pursuit of property idea did not make their intentions clear. They had to change it. Also, property is NOT mainly the fruit of one's labor. The Founders knew that the MAIN property you possess is your LIFE. Your body is your main asset. Before you lift a finger to do work you possess all of the property you will ever need to produce the other forms of property you speak of. Without the right to decide for ourselves how to pursue our happiness their is no other right. Labor is not the only form of property. Mort

You made some very valid points, however what was self evident to them is not self evident to the vast majority of people today. It was a self evident truth that them that property rights were one of our most fundamental rights. Whether it is directly stated or not it is a self evident truth. According to the Declaration, do we have a right to breathe, the read, to laugh or cry? These unalienable rights are not listed but they exist none the less.

Like you said, your life and your liberty are property. Everything about you is your property. Your hopes, dreams, your ideas and your personality define who you are. If we do not have property rights, then we don't truly have the right to life or liberty because as you set, life and liberty are property.

The Philosophy of John Locke   Click Here

Right to Property

Property rights are an extension to the right to life. In order to support yourself through reason and stay alive, you must be able to own and use the product of your labor. If the tools of your survival are subject to random confiscation, then your life is subject to random destruction.

Right to the Pursuit of Happiness

The right to the pursuit of happiness is freedom of action. To live, man must achieve values. To achieve values, man must be free to think and act. The right to the pursuit of happiness means a man is free to do anything he pleases, as long as it doesn't conflict with the rights of others. Since man must use his own mind to live, he must be able to choose his values and act towards them. Even acts which are destructive to himself must be allowed, or a man cannot live by his own mind. Ultimately, man must be free to pursue his own goals and happiness.

RSS

© 2017   Created by Keith Broaders.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service