Well, the French had cut off the Redcoat’s re-supply line and that was pretty much the end of it. Truth is, the Colonials didn’t so much win the war as the British were prevented from winning it. So who cares?
The shame of it all is the fact that the conflict was completely unnecessary. It resulted in absolutely no fundamental political change whatsoever, for, as we have already noted, the colonies had already become independent, sovereign nations by royal fiat.
So we can make the whole point of this exercise clear, let’s dwell on that point for a moment…
Some people believe that God was directly involved in the founding of this country; others scoff at the idea. I don’t know exactly where I stand on the issue. I’m satisfied to know that when my tour in this life is up, I’ll get the straight story on the matter, just like I will on such things as where the dinosaurs went, UFO’s, and what would have happened if Steve Bartman had been sitting in front of his TV instead of aisle 4, row 8, seat 113.
But no matter where you stand on the issue, there is no denying that the founding of The United States of America is absolutely unique in the world’s history. Never before, or since, has the world seen the sudden, simultaneous appearance of 13 sovereign nations, complete with functioning infrastructures and sharing a common language.
At the risk of making you want to put a different finger in the path of the hammer I keep swinging, you must hang on to that sovereignty bit. That’s the point we’re dwelling on: we didn’t go from being British colonies to being the good ol’ US of A; we went from being different British colonies to being different countries, just like, say, France, Spain, and the Switzerland. And that’s where the fun really began.
Even though the populations of these countries produced some excellent thinkers and people of remarkable character, no one had ever had such an opportunity laid at their feet as the Founders. The stakes were beyond comprehension. The colonies had a standard of living that was unheard of in most of the world – funny what real freedom does in that regard – and the new nations that replaced them weren’t about to give it up. All they had to do now was rid themselves of an occupying army under the command of the kind of people we used to call Indian-givers when I was a kid. (I sure wish I knew what that expression meant…)
To that end, during the fight, The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was adopted by The Second Continental Congress on November 15, 1777. It created, among other things, a mutual defense confederation.
As is commonly known, it was this political union that was replaced by the Constitution for the United States of America – in spite of the express orders by the several states to their delegates not to replace it.
Break time; see you next week sometime…
Picture of the Week
Really, America?...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Don't think, because you don't have any comments, that we're not reading. We're just blown away by your knowledge & ideas. Keep up the good work. Question: do you know yet which presidential candidate you might vote for?
Many thanks for your encouragement; be sure that my appreciation for it is real.
As far as the election goes, my personal pipe dream is the chance to see Ron Paul's name on the ballot. Frankly, as popular as he is on the Internet, and as strongly as his message resonates with the people that hear him, I think it foolish to expect him to be able to receive the nomination; he's too independent to be controlled. If it began to look like he was going to make a serious bid, I have absolutely no doubt that the man would be eliminated by forces within the government establishment, by violence if necessary. His perfect record of faithfulness to his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution makes him completely unacceptable to the traitors to whom we have given control of our money supply and our legislative and executive branches.
I don't claim to be much of a prognosticator when it comes to elections - I blew it entirely when Hillary Clinton took New York. (Hell, I didn't think even those folks were that obtuse; silly me.) But, I'll offer some thoughts, and if I turn out right, maybe somebody will have won a few bar bets.
1. The biggest wild card is Fred Thompson. If he announces, and if he can survive the first 3 weeks without some scandal erupting, then all of the other candidates would be well-advised to save their money and forfeit the game. He'll take 46 states, plus or minus two.
2. If what I consider impossible were to occur and Mr. Thompson doesn't announce, then Rudy Guiliani, local hero to false-flag operations specialists the world over, will be the one-term winner. He is perfectly acceptable to the Federal Reserve, and even as incompetent as the electorate has become, they'll see him as a the lesser of two evils when compared to the Democratic offering.
3. If Hillary Clinton gets the nod, she'll lose 46 or 47 states, which, by the way, is what elects the President, not the people. But that's a subject for another time.
All in all, I expect 2008 to be a frightening time for America. I expect another false-flag operation to occur in spring or summer, with the result of either a tighter grip around our liberties' throat as the talking heads blather on about security, or initiation of Presidential Directive 51.
I think the Boy Scout motto is a good one to adopt: Be Prepared.
What an idiot...
Leave it to me to pontificate while the crowd nods off and not actually answer the question...
The only current candidate that I would vote for is Ron Paul, even if Fred Thompson announces. I'd probably have to write Dr. Paul in, and I don't even know if that'll be on option here in Virginia.
Now, wouldn't it have been nicer if I had just said that in the first place?
I thought so, too.
Indian Giver-One who gives an item, object, or piece of property, and then takes it back-For instance-The US Government once gave the Cherokee nation Half of Arkansas, and we all know how that worked out...
Okay, I kinda' figured that taking back part, but how did the people who came up with the expression figure it was the Indians who were taking back what they gave? Your historical reference would seem to suggest it should be "U.S. government giver". Additionally, I think you should expand on that story; I'd love to read about it. Do we have a second? All those in favor, say "Aye".
Maybe the expression was dreamed up by the same people who said the War Between the States was fought over slavery. It would explain a lot.
Seriously though, I think we should make 23A king, and then we wouldn't have to worry about all the bs associated with the different political factions, notice I said factions not parties.
Post a Comment