Just an FYI to the readers of this blog…
From this day forward, I will be posting significantly less in order to focus more completely on my book.
Thank you for all of your support.
Cheers,
Daniel
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Though the sheer size of our national debt makes it difficult to grasp, perhaps the following illustration will help:
NOTE: All dollar amounts are expressed in 2010 USD
In 2010, the annual interest on the U.S. national debt was $414 billion. [1]
To put that number in perspective, remember that the ANNUAL INTEREST on the U.S. national debt is MORE than the ENTIRE GDP of the following countries: [2]
Saudi Arabia ($400.2 billion)… Austria ($361.5 billion)… Norway ($346.5 billion)… Denmark ($294.2 billion)… Republic of South Africa ($282.6 billion)… Argentina ($265.5 billion)… Iran ($253.8 billion)… Greece ($252.1 billion)… Thailand ($246.7 billion)… Hong Kong ($231.8 billion)… Finland ($227.4 billion)… Ireland ($220.9 billion)… Portugal ($195.7 billion)… Malaysia ($184.5 billion)… Venezuela ($181.9 billion)… Singapore ($173.9 billion)… United Arab Emirates ($173.4 billion)… Israel ($165.5 billion)… Colombia ($165.4 billion)… Pakistan ($163.5 billion)… Czech Republic ($162.6 billion)… Chile ($158.4 billion)… Philippines ($146.7 billion)… Egypt ($145.9 billion)… Nigeria ($138.2 billion)… Algeria ($127.7 billion)… Romania ($127 billion)… Peru ($122.6 billion)… New Zealand ($117.5 billion)… Hungary ($114.4 billion)… Iraq ($99.3 billion)… Ukraine ($98.5 billion)… Kuwait ($93.6 billion)… Puerto Rico ($87.5 billion)… Kazakhstan ($84.6 billion)… Vietnam ($81 billion)… Bangladesh ($80 billion)… Morocco ($74.2 billion)… Zaire ($71.2 billion)… Slovakia ($67.7 billion)… Angola ($50.7 billion)… Libya ($54.2 billion)… Burma Myanmar ($54 billion)… Serbia ($53.2 billion)… Belarus ($52.3 billion)… Cuba ($47.4 billion)… Sudan ($45.9 billion)… Ecuador ($45.1 billion)… Croatia ($43.8 billion)… Luxembourg ($43 billion)… Oman ($42.9 billion)… Guatemala ($42.2 billion)… Slovenia ($41.3 billion)… Dominican Republic ($40.6 billion)… Tunisia ($38.8 billion)… Syria ($37.5 billion)… Sri Lanka ($34.1 billion)… Bulgaria ($33.7 billion)… Azerbaijan ($32.8 billion)… Lebanon ($31.3 billion)… Lithuania ($29.3 billion)… Uruguay ($27.1 billion)… Kenya ($26.6 billion)… Costa Rica ($25.7 billion)… Panama ($24.6 billion)… Cameroon ($21.5 billion)… Cyprus ($20.8 billion)… El Salvador ($20.4 billion)… Cote D’Ivoire ($20.1 billion)… Uzbekistan ($19.7 billion)… Afghanistan ($19.5 billion)… Bahrain ($18.7 billion)… Jordan ($18.3 billion)… Macau ($18 billion)… Albania ($17.4 billion)… Ethiopia ($16.9 billion)… Iceland ($16.7 billion)… Latvia ($16.6 billion)… Tanzania ($16.5 billion)… Trinidad & Tobago ($16.1 billion)… Ghana ($15.2 billion)… Estonia ($14.7 billion)… Turkmenistan ($14.3 billion)… Uganda ($14.0 billion)… Zambia ($13.2 billion)… Bolivia ($12.7 billion)… Bosnia Herzegovina ($12.5 billion)… Paraguay ($11.6 billion)… Botswana ($10.8 billion)… Senegal ($10.7 billion)… Honduras ($10.6 billion)… Gabon ($10.4billion)… Brunei ($10.2 billion)… Nepal ($9.9 billion)… Jamaica ($9.8 billion)… Mozambique ($9.2 billion)… Georgia ($9.1 billion)… Cambodia ($8.1 billion)… Mauritius ($7.9 billion)… French Polynesia ($7.8 billion)… Mali ($7.6 billion)… Namibia ($7.6 billion)… Burkina ($7.6 billion)… Macedonia ($7.4 billion)… Rwanda ($7.3 billion)… New Caledonia ($7.2 billion)… Malta & Gozo ($7.1 billion)… Bahamas ($6.9 billion)… Papua New Guinea ($6.9 billion)… Madagascar ($6.8 billion)… Armenia ($6.6 billion)… Republic of Congo ($6.5 billion)… Chad ($6.5 billion)… Benin ($5.9 billion)… Yemen ($5.9 billion)… Nicaragua ($5.9 billion)… Haiti ($5.1 billion)… West Bank ($4.9 billion)… Niger ($4.7 billion)… Laos ($4.7 billion)… Malawi ($4.2 billion)… Equatorial Guinea ($4.1 billion)… Guinea ($4.0 billion)… Bermuda ($3.7 billion)… Tajikistan ($3.7 billion)… Moldova ($3.6 billion)… Barbados ($3.4 billion)… Swaziland ($3.2 billion)… Mongolia ($3.2 billion)… Fiji ($3.1 billion)… Kyrgyzstan ($3.1 billion)… Togo ($2.9 billion)… Mauritania ($2.4 billion)… Central African Republic ($1.8 billion)… Suriname ($1.7 billion)… Bhutan ($1.7 billion)… Cape Verde Islands ($1.6 billion)… Belize ($1.3 billion)… Lesotho ($1.3 billion)… Sierra Leone ($1.3 billion)… Liberia ($1.2 billion)…
Or put another way, the DAILY INTEREST on the U.S. national debt is MORE than the ENTIRE GDP of the following countries:
Antigua & Barbuda ($1.1 billion)… Maldives Islands ($1.1 billion)… Eritrea ($1.1 billion)… St. Lucia ($1.0 billion)… Burundi ($970 million)… Djibouti ($970 million)… Guyana ($960 million)… Seychelles ($764 million)… St. Vincent & the Grenadines ($576 million)… Grenada ($553 million)… St. Kitts & Nevis ($531 million)… Vanuatu New Hebrides ($476 million)… Samoa ($454 million)… Gambia ($454 million)… Comoros Islands ($432 million)… Guinea Bissau ($410 million)… Zimbabwe ($410 million)… Solomon Islands ($398 million)… Dominica ($365 million)… Tonga ($266 million)… Federated States of Micronesia ($255 million)… Palau ($188 million)… Marshall Islands ($144 million)… Sao Tome & Principe ($99.6 million)… Kiribati & Tuvalu Gilbert Islands ($99.6 million).
Confronted by the sheer enormity this fiscal mismanagement, the stunning ignorance guiding U.S. economic policy becomes all the more difficult to swallow. Federal bureaucrats naïvely suggest that the government should simply, “Tax the rich back into the stone age!” But how would that work out?
According to Forbes, the top ten richest people in America have a combined personal net worth of $270.8 billion: [3]
Bill Gates ($54 billion)… Warren Buffett ($45 billion)… Larry Ellison ($27 billion)… Christy Walton & family ($24 billion)… Charles Koch ($21.5 billion)… David Koch ($21.5 billion)… Jim Walton ($20.1 billion)… Alice Walton ($20 billion)… S. Robson Walton ($19.7 billion)… Michael Bloomberg ($18 billion).
Even if the IRS confiscated every last penny of their entire net worth, the federal government could only fund itself for 5.6 days (at $48 billion per day). Then what? Fortunately for America, the residents of the land of rainbows, lollipops, and unicorns have a solution to all of our economic woes by demanding that we force the rich to pay their “fair” share:
NOTE: All income thresholds have been adjusted for inflation and are expressed in 2010 USD.
In 1980…
In 1985…
NOTE: The Tax Reform Act of 1986 changed the definition of Adjusted Gross Income (AGI).
In 1990…
In 1995…
In 2000…
In 2005…
In 2008…
To tax a citizen’s earnings and savings—for other than defensive purposes—is to reduce both their capacity and their incentive to care for themselves and for others. Furthermore, this enslaves and debases the citizen who is then forced to rely upon the taxing power of government for their livelihood.
Government is intrinsically noncreative and can distribute ONLY what it first taxes away from the productive efforts of individuals. It is for this reason that statists are such fervent acolytes of coercion and accept without question the dogma that government is the answer to every problem.
It is long past time for federal bureaucrats and the politicians who appoint them to put on their “big boy” pants and start acting like the Framers of the Constitution intended. (And it wouldn’t hurt if they enrolled in some classes on economics).
[1] URL http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm.
[2] URL http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Macroeconomics/
[3] URL http://www.forbes.com/wealth/forbes-400/list.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
The Framers planted and nurtured these early abolitionist seeds from which the recognition of black equality and the eventual end of slavery would later blossom. This fact was further clarified by Bishop Richard Allen, a former slave from Pennsylvania who was later freed after converting his master to Christianity. Allen, a close friend of Benjamin Rush and several other anti-slavery Framers, later founded the first fully independent black denomination in the United States, the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church in 1816.
In an early address “To the People of Color,” he explained:
RICHARD ALLEN (1764-1831)… Founder of the AME Church (1816)… “Conductor” of the Underground Railroad (1797-1831)
“Many of the white people have been instruments in the hands of God for our good, even such as have held us in captivity, [and] are now pleading our cause [emancipation] with earnestness and zeal.” [1]
While the Framers made great strides towards ending the institution of slavery, their efforts would not reach fruition until generations later. Yet, somehow in the face of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, charges persist that the Framers failed to practically recognize that “all men are created equal.” [2]
In fact, politically correct revisionists have even claimed that the U.S. Constitution proves the Framers considered blacks to be “only three-fifths of a person.” This assertion is yet another blatant falsehood. The three-fifths clause was NOT a measurement of human worth; rather, it was an anti-slavery provision designed to limit the political power of Southern slaveholders by denying them additional representatives in Congress. Moreover, it also provided the South with a significant incentive to emancipate their slaves, since these Freedmen would then count as “five-fifths” of a person (for the purposes of representation).
Once emancipated, these former slaves would have given the South additional representation and greater legislative power. Consequently, (since Freedmen often outnumbered whites in the southern states) their presence would cripple any attempts by “pro-slaveryites” to regain political power. (NOTE: Free blacks already had the right to vote in several northern states and were not affected by the three-fifths compromise).
As the always eloquent Gouverneur Morris sarcastically inquired of the Southern delegates:
GOUVERNEUR MORRIS (1752-1816)… Founding Father… Signatory Articles of Confederation & U.S. Constitution… Delegate to Continental Congress [NY] (1778)… Delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 [PA]… U.S. Minister to France (1792-1794)… U.S. Senator [NY] (1800-1803)
“Are they [slaves] admitted as citizens? Then why are they not admitted on an equality with White Citizens? Are they admitted as property? Then why is not other property admitted to the computation?” [3]
Elbridge Gerry added his own biting retort to the Southerners:
ELBRIDGE GERRY (1744-1814)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence & Articles of Confederation… Delegate to Continental Congress [MA] (1776-1780, 1783-1785)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention of 1787 [MA]… U.S. Representative [MA] (1789-1793)… Governor [MA] (1810-1812)… U.S. Vice President [5th] (1813-1814)
“If Georgians can count their slaves, can New Englanders count their cattle?” [4]
Based on James Madison’s meticulous notes of the Constitutional Convention, two prominent professors offer further clarification on the true meaning of the three-fifths clause:
DR. THOMAS G. WEST (1945- )… Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas (1974- )… Director & Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute… B.A. Cornell University (1967)… U.S. Army Lieutenant (1969-1970)… Ph.D. Claremont Graduate University (1974)… Author of Vindicating the Founders: Race, Sex, Class, and Justice in the Origins of America (1997)
“[T]he Constitution allowed Southern States to count three-fifths of their slaves toward the population that would determine numbers of representatives in the federal legislature. This clause is often singled out today as a sign of black dehumanization: they are only three-fifths human. But the provision applied to slaves, not blacks. That meant that free blacks—and there were many, North as well as South—counted the same as whites.” [5]
[In the interest of full disclosure to Republican and Democrat readers, both Drs. Walter E. Williams and Thomas Sowell are staunch Libertarians].
DR. WALTER E. WILLIAMS (1936- )… B.A., M.A., & Ph.D. Economics UCLA… Doctor of Humane Letters Virginia Union University, Grove City College… Doctor of Laws from Washington & Jefferson College… John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics (1980- )… Author of over 150 publications which have been published journals Economic Inquiry, American Economic Review, Georgia Law Review, Journal of Labor Economics, Social Science Quarterly, Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy, Newsweek, Ideas on Liberty, National Review, Reader’s Digest, Cato Journal, Policy Review… Author of America: A Minority Viewpoint; The State Against Blacks (PBS documentary “Good Intentions”); All It Takes Is Guts; South Africa’s War Against Capitalism; Do the Right Thing: The People’s Economist Speaks; More Liberty Means Less Government… Author of nationally syndicated weekly column published by 140 newspapers/web sites… Member of board of directors at Grove City College, Reason Foundation, Hoover Institution… Member of advisory boards at Cato Institute, Landmark Legal Foundation, Institute of Economic Affairs, Heritage Foundation… Fellowships and awards from Foundation for Economic Education Adam Smith Award, Hoover Institution National Fellow, Ford Foundation Fellow, Valley Forge Freedoms Foundation George Washington Medal of Honor, Veterans of Foreign Wars U.S. News Media Award, Adam Smith Award, California State University Distinguished Alumnus Award, George Mason University Faculty Member of the Year, Alpha Kappa Psi Award.
“It was slavery’s opponents who succeeded in restricting the political power of the South by allowing them to count only three-fifths of their slave population in determining the number of congressional representatives. The three-fifths of a vote provision applied only to slaves, not to free blacks in either the North or South.” [6]
Why do revisionists so often and so broadly misrepresent the three-fifths clause? Dr. Williams continued:
“Politicians, news media, college professors, and leftists of other stripes are selling us lies and propaganda. To lay the groundwork for their increasingly successful attack on our Constitution, they must demean and criticize its authors. As Senator Joe Biden [D-DE] demonstrated during the Clarence Thomas hearings, the framers’ ideas about natural law must be trivialized or they must be seen as racists.” [7]
Having grown up in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania’s Richard Allen housing projects (his neighbors included a young Bill Cosby), Dr. Williams developed an insightful perspective on these issues that present some troubling implications for our modern society. He further clarifies: [8]
“So many Americans graduate high school and college having learned what to think as opposed to acquiring the tools of critical, independent thinking. Likewise, they have learned little about our nation’s history. As such, they fall prey to the rhetoric of political charlatans and quacks.
“Now let’s turn to history. Dr. Condoleezza Rice said, in an October 2003 speech to the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, ‘When the Founding Fathers said ‘We the People,’ they did not mean me. My ancestors were considered three-fifths of a person.’ Though not Dr. Rice’s intention, this common misunderstanding of history is often used to discredit the great men who founded our nation—without telling the whole story.
“The Founding Fathers struggled over the issue of slavery. George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, Patrick Henry and others were highly critical of slavery, describing it as a ‘lamentable evil,’ ‘disease of ignorance,’ ‘oppressive dominion’ and ‘an inconsistency not to be excused.’
“The delegates at the 1787 Philadelphia Constitutional Convention had to negotiate many contentious deal-breaking issues. Slavery was one of those issues. The Southern states made it clear that they wouldn’t vote to ratify the Constitution if it abolished slavery or ended the slave trade. Delegates from slave states wanted slaves counted as whole persons for the purposes of determining representation in Congress. That would have given the South greater political power.
“Delegate James Wilson offered a compromise whereby slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of determining the number of representatives a state had in the House of Representatives. The corresponding compromise established 1808 as the year the international slave trade would be abolished.
“There’s little question that slavery is an abomination and a gross violation of human rights, but the Founders had to decide whether there’d be a Union. Had morality been their sole guide, the Constitution would have never been ratified and a Union would not have been created.
“One question we might ask those who condemn the Founders is whether black Americans would be better off or worse off today with the Northern states having gone their way and the Southern states having gone theirs, and as a consequence no U.S. Constitution and no Union.
“Americans’ ignorance of our history and inability to think critically has provided considerable ammunition for those who want to divide us in pursuit of their agenda. I don’t usually buy into conspiracy theories, but it’s tempting to think America’s charlatans, quacks, and demagogues are in cahoots with the teaching establishments at our government schools and colleges to dumb down the nation.”
DR. THOMAS SOWELL (1930- ) B.A. Economics, magna cum laude Harvard College (1958), M.A. Economics Columbia University (1959), Ph.D. Economics University of Chicago (1968)… Senior Fellow at Hoover Institution (1980- )… Professor of Economics at UCLA (1974-1980), Visiting Professor of Economics at Amherst College (1977), Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (1976-1977), Project Director, The Urban Institute (1972-1974), Associate Professor of Economics at UCLA (1970-1972), Associate Professor of Economics at Brandeis University (1969-1970), Assistant Professor of Economics at Cornell University (1965-1969), Economic Analyst at AT&T (1964-1965), Lecturer in Economics at Howard University (1963-1964), Instructor in Economics at Rutgers University (1962-1963), Labor Economist at U.S. Department of Labor (1961-1962)… Author of On Classical Economics (2006); Black Rednecks and White Liberals (2005); The Quest for Cosmic Justice (1999); Conquests and Cultures (1998); Migrations and Cultures (1996); The Vision of the Anointed (1995); Race and Culture: A World View (1994); A Conflict of Visions (1987); Ethnic America (1981); Knowledge and Decisions (1980); Say’s Law: An Historical Analysis (1972).
Dr. Sowell—himself a product of Harlem, New York—expands on these modern suppositions and provides valuable insight into the factors destroying opportunities for black success, particularly in the inner cities: [9]
“If the share of the black vote that goes to the Democrats ever falls to 70 percent, it may be virtually impossible for the Democrats to win the White House or Congress, because they have long ago lost the white male vote and their support among other groups is eroding. Against that background, it becomes possible to understand their desperate efforts to keep blacks paranoid, not only about Republicans but about American society in general.
“Liberal Democrats, especially, must keep blacks fearful of racism everywhere, including in an administration [2005] whose Cabinet includes people of Chinese, Japanese, Hispanic, and Jewish ancestry, and two consecutive black Secretaries of State. Blacks must be kept believing that their only hope lies with liberals.
“Not only must the present be distorted, so must the past—and any alternative view of the future must be nipped in the bud. That is why prominent minority figures that stray from the liberal plantation must be discredited, debased and, above all, kept from becoming federal judges.
“A thoughtful and highly intelligent member of the California Supreme Court like Justice Janice Rogers Brown [a potential appointee to the U.S. Supreme Court] must be smeared as a right-wing extremist, even though she received 76 percent of the vote in California, hardly a right-wing extremist state. But desperate politicians cannot let facts stand in their way.
“Least of all could they afford to let Janice Rogers Brown become a national figure on the federal bench. The things she says and does could lead other blacks to begin to think independently—and that in turn threatens the whole liberal house of cards. If a smear is what it takes to stop her that is what liberal politicians and the liberal media will use.
“It’s ‘not personal’ as they say when they smear someone. It doesn’t matter how outstanding or upstanding Justice Brown is. She is a threat to the power that means everything to liberal politicians. The Democrats’ dependence on blacks for vote’s means that they must keep blacks dependent on them.
“Black self-reliance would be almost as bad as blacks becoming Republicans, as far as liberal Democrats are concerned. All black progress in the past must be depicted as the result of liberal government programs and all hope of future progress must be depicted as dependent on the same liberalism. In reality, reductions in poverty among blacks and the rise of blacks into higher level occupations were both more pronounced in the years leading up to the civil rights legislation and welfare state policies of the 1960s than in the years that followed.
“Moreover, contrary to political myth, a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But facts have never stopped politicians or ideologues before and show no signs of stopping them now.
“What blacks have achieved for themselves, without the help of liberals, is of no interest to liberals. Nothing illustrates this better than political reactions to academically successful black schools.
“Despite widespread concerns expressed about the abysmal educational performances of most black schools, there is remarkably little interest in those relatively few black schools which have met or exceeded national standards. Anyone who is serious about the advancement of blacks would want to know what is going on in those ghetto schools whose students have reading and math scores above the national average, when so many other ghetto schools are miles behind in both subjects. But virtually all the studies of such schools have been done by conservatives, while liberals have been strangely silent.
“Achievement is not what liberalism is about. Victimhood and dependency are.
“Black educational achievements are a special inconvenience for liberals because those achievements have usually been a result of methods and practices that go directly counter to prevailing theories in liberal educational circles and are anathema to the teachers’ unions that are key supporters of the Democratic Party.
“Many things that would advance blacks would not advance the liberal agenda. That is why the time is long overdue for the two to come to a parting of the ways.”
Our country desperately needs to dissolve the distinctions of race and remember that WE are ALL Americans. Principles must replace partisan talking-points and traditional right/left party alliances if we are to transcend the bigotry and discrimination fostered by political correctness, multiculturalism, and social[ized] justice.
At the end of the day, the most important question to answer is simply this: Has a sense of special grievance ever helped advance any people in any nation for any reason—or has what happened in centuries past been exploited by historical revisionists as a distraction to incite counterproductive divisiveness? The “elites” are relentless in their attempts to divide Americans against Americans using any available means, and one of their most effective weapons has been to play the victim card—any color will do.
[1] Richard Allen, “Address to the People of Color in the United States,” The Life Experience and Gospel Labors of the Right Reverend Richard Allen (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1983), p. 73.
[2] James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention, Max Farrand, ed. (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1911), Vol. III.
[3] William M. Wiecek, The Sources of Antislavery Constitutionalism in America, 1760-1848 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977), p. 67.
[4] William M. Wiecek, The Sources of Antislavery Constitutionalism in America, 1760-1848 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977), p. 67.
[5] Thomas G. West, “Was the American Founding Unjust? The Case of Slavery,” Principles: A Quarterly Review for Teachers of History and Social Science, The Claremont Institute (Spring/Summer 1992), p. 5.
[6] Walter E. Williams, “Some Fathers Fought Slavery,” Creators Syndicate, Inc. (26 May 1993).
[7] Walter E. Williams, “Some Fathers Fought Slavery,” Creators Syndicate, Inc. (26 May 1993).
[8] Walter E. Williams, “A Minority View: Exploiting Ignorance,” Townhall.com (18 April 2007).
[9] Thomas Sowell, “Liberals, Race & History,” Jewish World Review (24 May 2005).
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Note these additional examples of the anti-slavery positions resolutely embraced by several influential American figures:
JOHN WITHERSPOON (1723-1794)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence & Articles of Confederation… President of Princeton University [6th] (1768-1794)… Delegate to Continental Congress [NJ] (1776-1782)
“[I]t is certainly unlawful to make inroads upon others [slaves]…and take away their liberty by no better right than superior force.” [1]
GEORGE MASON (1725-1792)… Founding Father… “Co-Father of the Bill of Rights”… Delegate to Constitutional Convention of 1787 [VA]
“As much as I value a union of all the States, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade [slavery].” [2]
JOHN DICKINSON (1732-1808)… Founding Father… Signatory Articles of Confederation & U.S. Constitution… Delegate to Continental Congress [PA] (1774-1776)… Delegate to Continental Congress [DE] (1779-1781)… Governor [DE] (1781-1782)… Governor [PA] (1782-1785)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention of 1787 [PA]
“As Congress is now to legislate for our extensive territory lately acquired, I pray to Heaven that they may build up the system of the government on the broad, strong, and sound principles of freedom. Curse not the inhabitants of those regions, and of the United States in general, with a permission to introduce bondage [slavery].” [3]
RICHARD HENRY LEE (1732-1794)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence & Articles of Confederation… President of Continental Congress [12th] (1784-1785)… U.S. Senator [VA] (1789-1792)
“Christianity, by introducing into Europe the truest principles of humanity, universal benevolence, and brotherly love, had happily abolished civil slavery. Let us who profess the same religion practice its precepts…by agreeing to this duty.” [4]
PATRICK HENRY (1736-1799)… Founding Father… Governor [VA] [1st & 6th] (1776-1779) (1784-1786)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention [VA] (1788)
“I believe a time will come when an opportunity will be offered to abolish this lamentable evil. Everything we do is to improve it, if it happens in our day; if not, let us transmit to our descendants, together with our slaves, a pity for their unhappy lot and an abhorrence of slavery.” [5]
CHARLES CARROLL of CARROLLTON (1737-1832)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence… U.S. Senator [MD] (1789-1792)
“[W]hy keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil.” [6]
JOSEPH REED (1741-1785)… Founding Father… Signatory Articles of Confederation… Adjutant-General Continental Army… Governor [PA] (1778-1781)… Delegate to Continental Congress [PA] (1778-?)
“Honored will that State be in the annals of history which shall first abolish this violation of the rights of mankind [slavery].” [7]
OLIVER ELLSWORTH (1745-1807)… U.S. Senator [CT] (1789-1796)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention of 1787 [CT]… Chief Justice of U.S. Supreme Court [3rd] (1796-1800)
“All good men wish the entire abolition of slavery, as soon as it can take place with safety to the public, and for the lasting good of the present wretched race of slaves.” [8]
BENJAMIN RUSH (1746-1813)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence… Delegate to 1st Continental Congress [PA] (1774)… Treasurer of U.S. Mint (1797-1813)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention [PA]
“Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity… It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is a usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men.” [9]
LUTHER MARTIN (1748-1826)… Founding Father… Delegate to Constitutional Convention of 1787 [MD]… State Attorney General [MD] (1818-1822)
“[I]t ought to be considered that national crimes can only be and frequently are punished in this world by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slave-trade, and thus giving it a national sanction and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance of Him who is equally Lord of all and who views with equal eye the poor African slave and his American master.” [10]
JAMES WILSON (1742-1798)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence & U.S. Constitution… Delegate to Continental Congress [PA] (1776-1777)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention of 1787 [PA]… Associate Justice of U.S. Supreme Court (1789-1798)
“Slavery, or an absolute and unlimited power in the master over the life and fortune of the slave, is unauthorized by the common law… The reasons which we sometimes see assigned for the origin and the continuance of slavery appear, when examined to the bottom, to be built upon a false foundation. In the enjoyment of their persons and of their property, the common law protects all.”[11]
NOAH WEBSTER (1758-1843)… “Father of American Scholarship and Education”… Founder Connecticut Society for the Abolition of Slavery (1791)… Published An American Dictionary of the English Language (1828)
“Justice and humanity require it [the end of slavery]—Christianity commands it. Let every benevolent…pray for the glorious period when the last slave who fights for freedom shall be restored to the possession of that inestimable right.” [12]
Frederick Douglass, former slave and arguably America’s most important abolitionist, clearly believed that the Framers opposed slavery when he asserted:
“But I differ from those who charge this baseness on the framers of the Constitution of the United States. It is a slander upon their memory, at least, so I believe. There is not time now to argue the constitutional question at length—nor have I the ability to discuss it as it ought to be discussed. The subject has been handled with masterly power by Lysander Spooner, Esq., by William Goodell, by Samuel E. Sewall, Esq., and last, though not least, by Gerritt Smith, Esq. These gentlemen have, as I think, fully and clearly vindicated the Constitution from any design to support slavery for an hour… [L]et me ask, if it be not somewhat singular that, if the Constitution were intended to be, by its framers and adopters, a slave-holding instrument, why neither slavery, slaveholding, nor slave can anywhere be found in it.” [13]
Douglass makes a persuasive point since the Articles of Confederation (our nation’s first constitution) also made no mention of slavery. Under the Articles, congressional representation was organized with each state responsible for selecting its own representatives. For that reason, state population—which later became a critical issue for the future House of Representatives—was irrelevant. Furthermore, because the question of fugitive slaves and the idea of an abolitionist movement were issues almost unheard of as late as the 1780s, there is no mention of them in the Articles. The Fugitive Clause in Article 4 comes closest, but even that brief reference related to convicts not slaves.
Moreover, the Framers scrupulously avoided the words “slave” and “slavery” in the text of the U.S. Constitution. Instead, they used phrases like “importation of Persons” in Article 1, Section 9 for the slave trade, “other persons” in Article 1, Section 2, and “person held to service or labor” in Article 4, Section 2 for slaves. Not until the 13th Amendment (adopted 6 December 1865) was slavery specifically mentioned in the Constitution. The amendment employed the term to avoid any ambiguity as to exactly what the words were eliminating. Later, the 14th Amendment (adopted 9 July 1868) eliminated the euphemisms “other persons” and “three-fifths clause”.
Nevertheless, slavery remained a contentious issue for Congress to address. For that reason, a compromise was reached in Article 1, Section 9, which expressly limited Congress from prohibiting the “Importation” of slaves before 1808. However, after 1808 Congress immediately passed a law abolishing the slave trade, effective 1 January 1808.
In addition to fighting these political battles, several prominent Framers were also members of anti-slavery societies and included: Richard Bassett, James Madison, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, William Few, John Marshall, Richard Stockton, and Zephaniah Swift, et. al. Furthermore, based in part on the efforts of these Framers, the constitutions of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts expressly abolished slavery in 1780; [14] Connecticut and Rhode Island followed in 1784; [15] Vermont in 1786; [16] New Hampshire in 1792; [17] New York in 1799; [18] and finally, New Jersey in 1804. [19]
Moreover, the reason that Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa all prohibited slavery vis-à-vis congressional mandate (Northwest Ordinance of 1787), was largely due to the efforts of Constitutional Convention delegate, Rufus King. [20] The Ordinance, signed into law by President George Washington, [21] prohibited slavery in those territories. [22] Unsurprisingly, Washington signed the law and subsequently declared:
“I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery].” [23]
Look for the next installment, “Mental Slavery?”, Part 4
[1] John Witherspoon, The Works of John Witherspoon, Vol. VII, “Lectures on Moral Philosophy”(Edinburgh, UK: J. Ogle, 1815), p. 81.
[2] Jonathan Elliot, ed., Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol. III (Washington, DC: Printed for the Editor, 1836), pp. 452-454. Letter 15 June 1788.
[3] Charles J. Stille, The Life and Times of John Dickinson (Philadelphia, PA: J. P. Lippincott Company, 1891), p. 324. Letter from John Dickinson to George Logan, 30 January 1804.
[4] Richard Henry Lee, Memoir of the Life of Richard Henry Lee, and His Correspondence With the Most Distinguished Men in America and Europe, Illustrative of Their Characters, and of the American Revolution, Vol. I (Philadelphia, PA: H. C. Carey & I. Lea, 1825), pp. 17-19. First address to the Virginia House of Burgesses.
[5] William Wirt, Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry (Philadelphia, PA: James Webster, 1817). Letter from Patrick Henry to Robert Pleasants, 18 January 1773.
[6] Kate Mason Rowland, Life and Correspondence of Charles Carroll of Carrollton, Vol. II (New York & London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898), p. 231.
[7] William Armor, Lives of the Governors of Pennsylvania (Norwich, CT: T. H. Davis & Co., 1874), p. 223.
[8] James Madison, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 Revised Edition, Max Farrand, ed., Vol. III (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1937), p. 165.
[9] Benjamin Rush, Minutes of the Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates From the Abolition Societies Established in Different Parts of the United States, Assembled at Philadelphia, on the First Day of January, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four, “To the Citizens of the United States” (Philadelphia, PA: Zachariah Poulson, 1794), p. 24.
[10] Luther Martin, The Genuine Information Delivered to the Legislature of the State of Maryland Relative to the Proceedings of the General Convention Lately Held at Philadelphia (Philadelphia, PA: Eleazor Oswald, 1788), p. 57; cf. Jonathan Elliot, ed., Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol. I (Washington, DC: Printed for the Editor, 1836), p. 374.
[11] James Wilson, The Works of the Honorable James Wilson, Bird Wilson, ed., Vol. II, “The Natural Rights of Individuals” (Philadelphia, PA: Lorenzo Press, 1804), p. 488.
[12] Noah Webster, Effect of Slavery on Morals and Industry (Hartford, CT: Hudson & Goodwin, 1793), p. 48.
[13] Frederick Douglass, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?,” excerpt of speech to a meeting sponsored by the Rochester Ladies’ Anti-Slavery Society, 5 July 1852.
[14] A Constitution or Frame of Government Agreed Upon by the Delegates of the People of the State of Massachusetts-Bay, Article I, “Declaration of Rights” (Boston, MA: Benjamin Edes & Sons, 1780), p. 7; cf. Collinson Read, ed., An Abridgement of the Laws of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, PA: Printed for the Author, 1801), pp. 264-266. Act passed 1 March 1780.
[15] The Public Statue Laws of the State of Connecticut, Book I (Hartford, CT: Hudson & Goodwin, 1808), pp. 623-625. Act passed October 1777; cf. Rhode Island Session Laws (Providence, RI: Wheeler, 1784), pp. 7-8. Act passed 27 February 1784.
[16] The Constitutions of the Sixteen States (Boston, MA: Manning & Loring, 1797), p. 249. Article I, “Declaration of Rights,” Vermont, 1786.
[17] The Constitutions of the Sixteen States (Boston, MA: Manning & Loring, 1797), p. 50. Article I, “Bill of Rights,” New Hampshire, 1792.
[18] Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the Twenty-Second Session, Second Meeting of the Legislature (Albany, NY: Loring Andrew, 1798), pp. 721-723. Act passed 29 March 1799.
[19] Joseph Bloomfield, ed., Laws of the State of New Jersey, Compiled and Published Under the Authority of the Legislature (Trenton, NJ: James J. Wilson, 1811), pp. 103-105. Act passed 15 February 1804.
[20] Rufus King, The Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, Charles King, ed., Vol. I (New York, NY: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1894), pp. 288-289.
[21] Acts Passed at a Congress of the United States of America (Hartford, CT: Hudson & Goodwin, 1791), p. 104. Act passed 7 August 1789.
[22] “An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States Northwest of the River Ohio,” The Constitutions of the United States, Article VI (Trenton, NJ: Moore & Lake, 1813), p. 366.
[23] George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., Vol. XXVIII (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1932), pp. 407-408. Letter from George Washington to Robert Morris, 12 April 1786.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Moreover, until the Revolutionary Era, no serious effort had EVER been undertaken to dismantle the vile institution of slavery. Consider the following:
JOHN JAY (1745-1829)… Founding Father… President of Continental Congress (1778-1779)… U.S. Ambassador to Spain (1779-1782)… Co-author of the Federalist Papers (1788)… Chief Justice U.S. Supreme Court [1st] (1789-1795)… Governor [NY] (1795-1801)
“Prior to the great Revolution, the great majority…of our people had been so long accustomed to the practice and convenience of having slaves that very few among them even doubted the propriety and rectitude of it.” [1]
“It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.” [2]
“That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent, as well as unjust and perhaps impious, part.” [3]
Contrary to what is widely taught in public high school and college classrooms, most of the Framers despised slavery and actively sought its demise. The Revolution represented a turning point in colonial attitudes—and it was the Framers who contributed significantly to that shift. Indeed, many of the Framers vigorously railed against England’s forceful imposition of slavery upon the original 13 colonies. Moreover, during the pre-Revolutionary War era, Thomas Jefferson was among the most vehement critics of the British system of slavery:
THOMAS JEFFERSON (1743-1826)… Founding Father… Author of the Declaration of Independence… Delegate to 2nd Continental Congress [VA] (1775-1776)… Governor [VA] (1779-1781)…Delegate to Congress of the Confederation [VA] (1783-1784)… U.S. Ambassador to France (1785-1789)…U.S. Secretary of State [1st] (1790-1793)… U.S. Vice President [2nd] (1797-1801)… U.S. President [3rd] (1801-1809)
“He [King George III] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither… Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce [King George III opposed efforts to prohibit the slave trade].” [4]
Jefferson’s opposition to the institution of slavery remained steadfast after America won her freedom from England:
“The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other… And with what execration [curse] should the statesman be loaded, who permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other… And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.” [5]
HENRY LAURENS (1724-1792)… Founding Father… Signatory Articles of Confederation… Delegate to 2nd Continental Congress [SC] (1776)… President of 2nd Continental Congress (1777)… U.S. Ambassador to Holland (1779-1780)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention [SC] (1788):
“I abhor slavery. I was born in a country where slavery had been established by British Kings and Parliaments as well as by the laws of the country ages before my existence… In former days there was no combating the prejudices of men supported by interest; the day, I hope, is approaching when, from principles of gratitude as well as justice, every man will strive to be foremost in showing his readiness to comply with the Golden Rule.” [6]
In fact, several colonial attempts to thwart slavery had met with determined resistance from the British Parliament:
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN (1706-1790)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence & U.S. Constitution… U.S. Postmaster General [1st] (1775-1776)… U.S. Ambassador to France (1778-1785)… U.S. Ambassador to Sweden (1782-1783)… Governor [PA] (1785-1788):
“…a disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty, and that even he Virginia Assembly have petitioned the King for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed.” [7]
Even before the Continental Congress (1774-1789) was convened, Pennsylvania Quakers became the first whites to condemn slavery in either the American colonies or Europe, and later played a vital role in the abolitionist movement. Quakers denounced slavery as early as 1688, when four German Quakers organized a protest in Pennsylvania. Influential leaders John Woolman and Anthony Benezet likewise protested against slavery and demanded that Quaker society sever ties with the slave trade. [8]
In 1774, Benjamin Franklin and Benjamin Rush founded America’s first antislavery society, while John Jay was president of a similar society in New York. When William Livingston heard of Jay’s society, he promptly wrote them:
WILLIAM LIVINGSTON (1723-1790)… Founding Father… Signatory U.S. Constitution… Delegate to Continental Congress [NJ] (1774-1776)… Governor [NJ] (1776-1790)… Delegate to Constitutional Convention [NJ] (1787)
“I would most ardently wish to become a member of it [the society in New York] and… I can safely promise them that neither my tongue, nor my pen, nor purse shall be wanting to promote the abolition of what to me appears so inconsistent with humanity and Christianity… May the great and the equal Father of the human race, who has expressly declared His abhorrence of oppression, and that He is no respecter of persons, succeed a design so laudably calculated to undo the heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke.” [9]
In a separate correspondence to his friend James Pemberton, Livingston added these sentiments:
“I hope we shall at last, and if it so please God I hope it may be during my life time, see this cursed thing [slavery] taken out… For my part, whether in a public station or a private capacity, I shall always be prompt to contribute my assistance towards effecting so desirable an event.” [10]
Several of the Framers who owned slaves as British citizens released them in the years following the separation of the 13 colonies from England (e.g., George Washington, John Dickinson, Caesar Rodney, William Livingston, George Wythe, John Randolph of Roanoke, et. al.). Furthermore, a number of Framers never owned ANY slaves. In the words of John Adams:
JOHN ADAMS (1735-1826)… Founding Father… Signatory Declaration of Independence… Delegate to 1st Continental Congress [MA] (1774)… Delegate to 2nd Continental Congress [MA] (1775-1778)… U.S. Ambassador to Holland (1782-1788)… U.S. Ambassador to England (1785-1788)… U.S. Vice President [1st] (1789-1797)… U.S. President [2nd] (1797-1801)
“[M]y opinion against it [slavery] has always been known… [N]ever in my life did I own a slave.” [11]
Further confirmation that the Virginia Framers attempted to dismantle the foul institution of slavery was provided by John Quincy Adams (known as the “hell-hound of abolition” for his tireless crusade against slavery). Adams explained:
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS (1767-1848)… U.S. Ambassador to Holland (1794-1797)… U.S. Ambassador to Prussia (1797-1801)… U.S. Senator [MA] (1803-1808)… U.S. Ambassador to Russia (1809-1814)… U.S. Ambassador to England (1814-1817)… U.S. Secretary of State [8th] (1817-1825)… U.S. President [6th] (1825-1829)… U.S. Representative [MA] (1831-1848)
“The inconsistency of the institution of domestic slavery with the principles of the Declaration of Independence was seen and lamented by all the southern patriots of the Revolution; by no one with deeper and more unalterable conviction than by the author of the Declaration himself [Jefferson]. No charge of insincerity or hypocrisy can be fairly laid to their charge. Never from their lips was heard one syllable of attempt to justify the institution of slavery. They universally considered it as a reproach fastened upon them by the unnatural step-mother country [England] and they saw that before the principles of the Declaration of Independence, slavery, in common with every other mode of oppression, was destined sooner or later to be banished from the earth. Such was the undoubting conviction of Jefferson to his dying day. In the Memoir of His Life, written at the age of seventy-seven, he gave to his countrymen the solemn and emphatic warning that the day was not distant when they must hear and adopt the general emancipation of their slaves.” [12]
Although Jefferson personally introduced a bill designed to abolish slavery, [13] it is important to note that opposition to the institution was not unanimous among the Southern Framers. According to testimony from Virginians James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and John Rutledge, it was the Framers from North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia who were the strongest proponents of slavery.[14]
However, despite the pro-slavery sentiments of those States, the clear majority of Framers detested the evil institution. For instance, on one occasion, several Southern pro-slavery advocates invoked the Bible in support of slavery, which prompted this response from Elias Boudinot:
ELIAS BOUDINOT (1740-1821)… Founding Father… State Assemblyman [NJ] (1775)… Delegate to 2nd Continental Congress (1777-1778, 1781-1783)… President of Continental Congress (1782-1783)… U.S. Representative [NJ] (1789-1795)… Director of U.S. Mint (1795-1805)
“[E]ven the sacred Scriptures had been quoted to justify this iniquitous traffic [slavery]. It is true that the Egyptians held the Israelites in bondage for four hundred years…but…gentlemen cannot forget the consequences that followed: they were delivered by a strong hand and stretched-out arm and it ought to be remembered that the Almighty Power that accomplished their deliverance is the same yesterday, today, and for ever.” [15]
Look for the next installment, “Mental Slavery?”, Part 3
[1] John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed. (New York, NY: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1891), Vol. III, p. 342. Letter to the English Anti-Slavery Society, June 1788.
[2] Benson J. Lossing, Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence (Aledo, TX: Wallbuilder Press, 1995), reprint of 1848 original.
[3] John Jay, Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed. (New York & London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1891), Vol. III, pp. 168-169. Letter from John Jay to Dr. Richard Price, 27 September 1785.
[4] Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed. (Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903), Vol. I, p. 34.
[5] Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Philadelphia, PA: Matthew Carey, 1794), Query XVIII, pp. 236-237.
[6] Henry Laurens, Materials for History Printed From Original Manuscripts, the Correspondence of Henry Laurens of South Carolina, Frank Moore, ed. (New York, NY: Zenger Club, 1861), p. 20. Letter from Henry Laurens to John Laurens, 14 August 1776.
[7] Benjamin Franklin, The Works of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, ed. (Boston, MA: Tappan, Whittemore, & Mason, 1839), Vol. VIII, p. 42. Letter from Benjamin Franklin to Reverend Dean Woodward, 10 April 1773.
[8] John Woolman, The Journal and Major Essays of John Woolman, Phillip P. Moulton, ed. (Richmond, VA: Friends United Press, 1989).
[9] William Livingston, The Papers of William Livingston, Carl E. Prince, ed. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1988), Vol. V, p. 255. Letter from William Livingston to the New York Manumission Society, 26 June 1786.
[10] William Livingston, The Papers of William Livingston, Carl E. Prince, ed. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1988), Vol. V, p. 358. Letter from William Livingston to James Pemberton, 20 October 1788.
[11] Charles Francis Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States: With a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, & Company, 1854), Vol. IX, pp. 92-93. Letter from John Adams to George Churchman and Jacob Lindley, 24 January 1801.
[12] John Quincy Adams, An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport at Their Request on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1837 (Newburyport, MA: Charles Whipple, 1837), p. 50.
[13] Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed. (Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903), Vol. I, p. 4.
[14] Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Ellery Bergh, ed. (Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903), Vol. I, p. 28; cf. James Madison, The Papers of James Madison (Washington, DC: Langtree & O’Sullivan, 1840), Vol. III, p. 1395, letter dated 22 August 1787; cf. James Madison, The Writings of James Madison, Gaillard Hunt, ed. (New York, NY: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1910), Vol. IX, p. 2. Letter from James Madison to Robert Walsh, 27 November 1819.
[15] The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States (Washington, DC: Gales & Seaton, 1834), First Congress, Second Session, p. 1518, 22 March 1790; cf. George Adams Boyd, Elias Boudinot, Patriot and Statesman (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1952), p. 182.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
“But the whole thing, after all, may be put very simply. I believe that it is better to tell the truth than to lie. I believe that it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe that it is better to know than to be ignorant.” [1] —H. L. Mencken (1880 – 1956)
It is no secret that America’s public school system is failing—badly. Learning “how to think” has been replaced by “what to think.” Education has been replaced by indoctrination and the freedom to discuss important issues of our time has become increasingly restricted. Education bureaucrats (“educrats”) continue to force-feed American students a steady diet of political correctness and trendy multiculturalism—for our own good of course. It would seem that our public high schools and universities have now adopted the motto: “We support your constitutional right to free thinking—as long as you agree with us.”
Consider for a moment, how difficult it is to even discuss an issue like slavery or race without being immediately labeled a “racist” or dismissed as someone who, “just wouldn’t understand.” Rather than engage in honest academic inquiry, educrats are so emotionally attached to their sacred agendas that they become completely unhinged whenever someone suggests that they actually examine such unfamiliar concepts as facts, evidence, or logic. Consequently, today’s politically correct, multicultural climate has caused far too many teachers to believe they are doing minority students “a favor” by cultivating past grievances and telling them how oppressed they are in the present—and how their future will be obstructed by white racism. These are the sorts of “friends” who do far more damage than enemies.
In fact, these same “friends” have forced minority public school students to ask themselves a simple question: “Why endure all the hard work, self-discipline, and self-denial required by a first-rate education if ‘The Man’ is going to prevent me from getting anywhere anyway?” Those who have been pushing this line for years are now suddenly surprised and dismayed to discover that large numbers of minority students across the country regard academic striving as “acting white.” A phenomenon that became a sadly familiar pattern at the public high school where I taught for three years.
On several occasions in the public school classroom, I noticed that minority students considered speaking correct English, or even observing rules of polite society, as “acting white.” Shockingly, white faculty members often cheered them on in their self-destructive behavior or at least “understood” them and defended their actions. In a supreme act of condescension, minorities have been effectively adopted as mascots by the educational establishment. Mascots serve to symbolize something for others, but the actual well-being of the mascot himself is seldom, if ever, a major concern.
Rather than empowering these students with knowledge of the truth, they are often forced to embrace the debilitating and degrading lessons of victimization. Tragically, since “victims” are—by definition—powerless, there is no hope for overcoming such a cruel lie. Gradually, these “victims” are drained of hope and initiative until they lack the confidence to pursue loftier endeavors.
Booker T. Washington, himself a former slave, repudiated such victimhood. He refused to allow himself to be crushed under the oppressive weight of racism and actually drew strength from the obstacles in his path. Truly, Booker T. Washington is an inspiration for ALL Americans irrespective of skin color:
“I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome while trying to succeed. Out of the hard and unusual struggle through which he is compelled to pass, he gets a strength, a confidence, that one misses whose pathway is comparatively smooth by reason of birth and race.” [2]
The true story—the largely untold story—is the inspiring history of blacks who overcame seemingly insurmountable odds to enjoy the opportunities provided by our incomparable (if flawed) United States of America. These individuals serve as an inspiration for ALL Americans because they embody OUR shared hopes and dreams. It is inexcusably tragic that advocates of victimhood negate the astonishing achievements of blacks who managed to thrive DESPITE slavery, discrimination, and prejudice. It is likewise unfortunate that those suffering from “white guilt” have formed an unholy alliance with race-baiters to perpetuate their agendas of grievance. In the end, the price of victimhood has proven extraordinarily steep, as our minority students find themselves imprisoned in an educational system that does little or nothing to explore and develop their vast, unfulfilled potential.
Several great Americans—whose insights remain shamefully forgotten—held views widely divergent from those advocated by today’s politically correct elites.
BOOKER T. WASHINGTON (1856-1915)…influential educator, author, orator, political leader, and former slave:
“There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs—partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs… There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well because as long as the disease holds out they not only have an easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before the public.” [3]
FREDERICK DOUGLASS (1818-1895)…prominent social reformer, orator, writer, statesman, and former slave:
“Everybody has asked the question…’What shall we do with the Negro?’ I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are worm-eaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! I am not for tying or fastening them on the tree in any way, except by nature’s plan, and if they will not stay there, let them fall. And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone!” [4]
LOUIS W. SULLIVAN, M.D. (1933- )…chairman of the board of the National Health Museum in Atlanta, GA…chairman of the Sullivan Alliance to Transform America’s Health Professions…founding dean and President Emeritus of Morehouse School of Medicine…chairman of the President’s Commission on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (2002-2009)…co-chairman of the President’s Commission on HIV and AIDS (2001-2006):
“The tragic truth is that the language of ‘victimization’ is the true victimizer—a great crippler of young minds and spirits. To teach young people that their lives are governed—not by their own actions, but by socio-economic forces or government budgets or other mysterious and fiendish sources beyond their control—is to teach our children negativism, resignation, passivity, and despair.” [5]
THOMAS SOWELL (1930- )…influential author…Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution (Stanford University)…Professor of Economics at UCLA (1974-1980) and Amherst College (1977)…Project Director at The Urban Institute (1972-1974)…Associate Professor of Economics at Brandeis University (1969-1970)…Assistant Professor of Economics at Cornell University (1965- 1969)…Economic Analyst at AT&T (1964-1965)…Lecturer in Economics at Howard University (1963-1964)…Instructor in Economics at Douglass College, Rutgers University (1962-1963)…Labor Economist, U.S. Department of Labor (1961-1962):
“The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were necessary for some people in some places. But making these things the cause of the rise of most blacks only betrays an ignorance of history.
“The most dramatic rise of blacks out of poverty occurred before the civil rights movement of the 1960s. [6] That’s right—before. But politicians, activists and the intelligentsia have spread so much propaganda that many Americans, black and white, are unaware of the facts.
“There is a lot of political mileage to be gotten by convincing blacks that they owe everything to the government and could not make it in this world otherwise. Dependency plus paranoia equals votes. But blacks made it in this world before the government paid them any attention.
“Nor has the economic rise of blacks been sped up by civil rights legislation. More blacks rose into professional ranks in the five years preceding passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than in the five years after its passage. [7]
“What moved blacks up was a rapid increase in education. There was certainly discrimination but, in many fields that demanded higher levels of education, there were not that many blacks to discriminate against in the first place.” [8]
Slavery has always been among the most abhorrent and self-evident evils ever perpetrated in the annals of recorded human history. However, it is interesting to note that while slavery was common to ALL cultures, both civilized and uncivilized, only ONE civilization developed a moral revulsion against it—Western Civilization.
This fact begs several questions: what explains the tenacity with which educational elites indoctrinate captive audiences of students into the modern, politically correct view of slavery? Since slavery is a worldwide evil, why do these same elites maintain such a rigidly narrow view on the scope of its history? Why do so many elites use this evil–which has plagued mankind for thousands of years—to focus so completely upon the present-day uses of that historic evil? Ironically, it is often those most critical of a “Eurocentric” worldview who are themselves the most Eurocentric when it comes to assigning blame for the evils and failings of the human race. Clearly, scoring ideological points against Western civilization, or inducing guilt to coerce benefits from the white population today, are greatly enhanced by making enslavement appear to be a peculiarly white, or at least American, crime.
Before examining the relationship between American slavery and the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, it would be instructive to review the history of the institution itself.
For centuries—since the spread of slavery was limited by geography—people were enslaved because they were vulnerable and NOT because they were a particular race. In other words, Europeans enslaved Europeans, Africans enslaved Africans, Asians enslaved Asians, etc. Therefore, to make racism the driving force behind slavery is to make a historically recent factor the cause of an institution which originated thousands of years earlier. This enshrinement of racism as an over-arching causal factor aligns far more closely with current multicultural agendas than with the historical record. [16] Moreover, until the Revolutionary Era, no serious effort had EVER been undertaken to dismantle the vile institution of slavery.
Look for the next installment, “Mental Slavery?”, Part 2
[1] George Seldes, The Great Thoughts (New York, NY: Ballantine Books, 1985).
[2] Booker T. Washington, Up From Slavery (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1901).
[3] Booker T. Washington, My Larger Education: Being Chapters from My Experience (New York, NY: Doubleday, Page & Co., 1911), cited in “A Curriculum of Indoctrination,” Issues and Views (Fall 1992).
[4] Frederick Douglass, “What the Black Man Wants,” excerpt of speech to the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, April 1865.
[5] E.J. Dionne, “Struggling to Find a Way to Teach Values”, Washington Post (9 July 1990), p. A-5.
[6] Daniel O. Price, Changing Characteristics of the Negro Population, U.S. Bureau of the Census (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 223-225.
[7] Daniel O. Price, Changing Characteristics of the Negro Population, U.S. Bureau of the Census (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969), pp. 223-225.
[8] Thomas Sowell, “Silly Letters,” Jewish World Review (1 October 2003).
[9] Orlando Patterson, Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982), pp. 406-407; cf. W. Montgomery Watt, The Influence of Islam on Medieval Europe (Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 1972), p. 19; cf. Bernard Lewis, Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 11; cf. Daniel Evans, “Slave Coast of Europe,” Slavery and Abolition, Vol. 6, No. 1 (May 1985), p. 53, note 3; cf. William D. Phillips, Jr., Slavery From Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1985), p. 57.
[10] Daniel Evans, “Slave Coast of Europe,” Slavery and Abolition, Vol. 6, No. 1 (May 1985), p. 42.
[11] Robert C. Davis, Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary, and Italy, 1500-1800 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), p. 23.
[12] Martin A. Klein, ed., “Introduction: Modern European Expansion and Traditional Servitude in Africa and Asia,” Breaking the Chains: Slavery, Bondage, and Emancipation in Modern Africa and Asia (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993), p. 8; cf. R. W. Beachey, The Slave Trade of Eastern Africa (New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1976), p. 137.
[13] Martin A. Klein, ed., “Introduction: Modern European Expansion and Traditional Servitude in Africa and Asia,” Breaking the Chains: Slavery, Bondage, and Emancipation in Modern Africa and Asia (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993), pp. 19-20; cf. David Brion Davis, The Problem of Slavery in the Age of Revolution, 1770-1823 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1975), p. 63.
[14] William D. Phillips, Jr., Slavery From Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1985), p. 57.
[15] Martin A. Klein, ed., “Introduction: Modern European Expansion and Traditional Servitude in Africa and Asia,” Breaking the Chains: Slavery, Bondage, and Emancipation in Modern Africa and Asia (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993), p. 8; cf. R. W. Beachey, The Slave Trade of Eastern Africa (New York: Harper & Row, 1976), p. 137.
[16] Daniel J. Boorstein, The Americans: The National Experience (New York, NY: Random House, 1965), Vol. II, p. 203; cf. Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals (San Francisco, CA: Encounter Books, 2005), pp. 113-114.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL RATINGS, SINCE 1950 [1]
| PRESIDENT | HIGHEST RATING | LOWEST RATING |
| George W. Bush | 90% | 29% |
| George H. W. Bush | 89% | 29% |
| Harry Truman | 87% | 23% |
| John F. Kennedy | 83% | 56% |
| Dwight Eisenhower | 79% | 48% |
| Lyndon Johnson | 79% | 35% |
| Jimmy Carter | 75% | 28% |
| Bill Clinton | 73% | 37% |
| Gerald Ford | 71% | 37% |
| Ronald Reagan | 68% | 35% |
| Richard Nixon | 67% | 24% |
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
It will certainly come as no surprise to anyone who has been conscious for the past two years, that the United States economy is…ah…struggling to put it nicely. High unemployment, market insecurity, government overspending, and the declining dollar are just a few of the problems plaguing the nation. Lost amidst this gloomy financial news, is the extent to which the average American’s purchasing power has declined.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Once upon a time, there lived a man, his wife, and their six year old daughter. One day, they were visited by a long-time family friend. Later that night while they were all eating dinner together, the guest asked the six year old what she wanted to be when she grew up. The girl answered that she wanted to be President some day. Both of her parents were college professors who taught “Useless-information-that-my-professor-claims-is-really-super-important” at a prestigious university and they beamed with pride at their daughter’s lofty ambitions.
The guest then asked the little girl, “If you did become President one day, what is the first thing that you would do?”
She answered, “I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.”
“Wow! What a worthy goal,” the guest complimented her, “but you don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that.”
“In fact, you can come over to my house tomorrow, mow the lawn, weed the garden, sweep the yard, and I’ll pay you $50. Then I’ll drive you to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food or a new house.”
The six year old pondered this for a few moments. While her mother glared at their guest, the little girl looked him straight in the eye and asked, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?”
The guest replied, “Welcome to reality. And by the way, you should try to convince your parents to find a different subject to teach.”
…And the little girl’s parents never spoke to their old friend again because they were so tolerant and accepting of ideas or opinions different from their own.
SOURCE: Unknown
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Since 2001, the Los Angeles Unified District (LAUSD) has spent $1.2 billion (2009 USD) to “educate” 8,400 students at a cost of $142,857.14 per student. [1] [2] [3] [4]
In 2001, the LAUSD spent $154 or $187 million (2009 USD) to purchase and renovate the 29-story, 928,000 square foot tower at 333 S. Beaudry Ave that serves as their central headquarters and houses 3,400 district employees at a cost of $55,000 per employee.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Once upon a time, there lived a young woman who had almost completed her first year of schooling at a prestigious university that she could never afford to pay for herself. But fortunately, her parents had worked hard and saved enough money to cover her tuition.
The young woman had already been well-educated in all the latest politically correct ideas and was majoring in “Useless-information-that-my-professor-claims-is-really-super-important.” She considered herself to be quite intelligent—certainly much brighter than her parents—and so one particular day, she challenged her father’s opposition to big government, high taxes, and unsustainable social welfare programs.
Suddenly, in the middle of this heated debate, the father stopped his daughter and asked her, “How are you doing in school?”
She proudly replied that her GPA was a 4.0, but admitted that it had been really difficult to maintain. Since she had to spend nearly every spare moment studying she never had time to go out and party. She didn’t have time for a boyfriend nor even have many college friends because she was spending all her time studying. In fact, the part-time job her father insisted she keep left absolutely no time for anything else.
The father asked, “How is your friend Mary?”
The daughter sarcastically replied that Mary was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never studied, went to all the parties, was on a date every weekend, and didn’t even have a job. Mary was always complaining about not having any money, but didn’t want to work. In fact, she often didn’t even show up for classes because she was so hung over.
The father then asked his daughter why she didn’t go to the Dean’s office and request that 1.0 be taken from her 4.0 and given to her friend who only had a 2.0. That way they would both have a respectable 3.0 GPA. In addition, she could also give Mary half the money she earned from her job so that her friend would no longer be broke.
The daughter angrily retorted, “That wouldn’t be fair. I worked really hard for my grades and my money, and Mary just parties all the time. Why should her laziness and irresponsibility be rewarded with half of what I’ve worked so hard for?”
The father slowly smiled and said, “Welcome to reality. And by the way, you should really consider changing your major.”
SOURCE: Unknown
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
The media has enjoyed a lengthy love affair with the conflicting theories of global warming and global cooling.
NOTE: A few of the headlines even contradict the “conventional wisdom” of the times.
FROM THE 1860’s TO 1920’s…GLOBAL COOLING?
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Although going “green” has been extremely lucrative for Al Gore as he is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire”, [1] he is better known for his Nobel prize-winning documentary (An Inconvenient Truth, 2007) [2] advancing the theory of global warming.
The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory embraced by Mr. Gore and his fellow climate alarmists essentially proposes the following:
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Once upon a time, the government owned a vast scrap yard in the middle of the desert. But Congress grew concerned that someone might steal from it at night so they formed a Scrap Yard Oversight Committee to determine what should be done. After several drafts and numerous revisions the committee eventually decided to create a night watchman position, GS-1, and hired someone for the job.
Then one day, Congress asked the committee, “How does the night watchman perform his duties without instructions?” So the committee created a planning position and hired two people, one person to write the 1000-page instruction manual, GS-11.1, and one person to execute time studies, GS-11.2.
Then one day, Congress asked the committee, “How will we know the night watchman is performing his duties correctly?” So the committee created a quality control position and hired two people, one person to conduct the studies, GS-21.1, and one person to write the quarterly 2000-page reports, GS-21.2.
Then one day, Congress asked the committee, “How will these employees get paid?” So the committee created a financial management position and hired two people, one person to maintain time records, GS-31.1, and one person to oversee payroll, GS-31.2.
Then one day, Congress asked the committee, “Who will all of these employees be accountable to?” So the committee created an administrative position and hired three people, an Administrative Officer, GM-41, an Assistant Administrative Officer, GS-41.1, and a Legal Secretary, GS-41.2.
Then one day, Congress said, “We established this agency one year ago and have already exceeded our budget by $100 million. Until we can decide how to resolve the shortfall, we must increase the budget and hire additional employees for the next fiscal year.” So Congress increased the budget by $100 million, hired ten additional administrators, GM-41s…….and laid off the night watchman.
SOURCE: Unknown
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
[What would JFK do?] President John F. Kennedy appeared to have an excellent grasp of fiscal reality and perhaps ALL members of Congress would do well to heed his advice concerning the immutable relationship between raising taxes and ruining the economy.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
“The legislature, like the executive, has ceased, save indirectly, to be even the creature of the people: it is the creature, in the main, of pressure groups, and most of them, it must be manifest, are of dubious wisdom and even more dubious honesty. Laws are no longer made by a rational process of public discussion; they are made by a process of blackmail and intimidation, and they are executed in the same manner. The typical lawmaker of today is a man wholly devoid of principle–a mere counter in a grotesque and knavish game. If the right pressure could be applied to him he would be cheerfully in favor of polygamy, astrology or cannibalism.” –H. L. Mencken, American Mercury (May 1930).
The unseemly influence of lobbyists is not just unconstitutional—it threatens the very freedom of our republic. Moreover, unless their influence is restrained, it will no longer matter which party wins elections because everything will always remain “business as usual.”
From 1998 to 2010, lobbyists spent… [1] Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Given our nation’s precarious financial condition, I hope that ALL Americans can agree with the following…
“Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem.”
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.”
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
In reviewing the “Top 100 All-Time Donors, 1989-2010″, it is interesting to note that several of the top donors are unions. [1]
Just follow the money… [2] [3] Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
The U.S. Congress bears sole responsibility for artificially increasing oil prices since it is OUR oil that remains largely untapped beneath OUR deserts, OUR forests, OUR swamps and OUR oceans. These politicians that we have freely elected…and re-elected…and then re-elected [sigh] are preventing OUR oil from being drilled by us and sold to us. Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Regardless of your personal religious–or non-religious–views, it is a historical fact that the United States of America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. The true controversy is simply that apologists argue Judeo-Christian principles are the source of our national strength, while critics argue that these same principles–if they are even true–have actually been detrimental to our national progress.
Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Judge for yourself how successfully the planks of the Communist Party platform have been grafted into the tree of American liberty.
On 10 January 1963, the following was entered into the Congressional record [1] by U.S. Representative Albert Sydney Herlong, Jr. (1909-1995) [D-FL] who served in Congress from 1949 to 1969.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
The federal government is growing at a faster pace than any other sector of today’s economy.[1] [2] [3] [4]
WHAT THE TAXPAYER PAYS FOR…
Salaries…
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Successful coaches reward their most productive players with additional playing time and do not punish their productivity by benching them. Likewise, successful governments reward their most productive citizens with tax breaks and do not punish their productivity by oppressive taxation. After all, the more the government takes, the less incentive business owners have to be productive. Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Once upon a time, 50,000 people went to a baseball game, but sadly the game was rained out. A refund was then due.
The home team was about to mail the refund checks when Congress intervened and suggested that they send out refund amounts based on the federal government’s interpretation of “fairness.” Obviously, if the refunds were distributed based on the price each person paid for their tickets, most of the money would go to the ticket holders of the most expensive tickets. That would be unconscionable.
Therefore, in the interest of “fairness” Congress decided that…
The people in the $10 seats would be refunded $15, because they have less money to spend. Call it an “Earned Income Ticket Credit.” People “earn” it by demonstrating low ambition, few skills, and poor work habits, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.
The people in the $25 seats would be refunded $25, because that is only fair.
The people in the $50 seats would be refunded $1, because they already make a lot of money and do not need a refund. If these people can afford a $50 ticket, then they must not be paying enough taxes.
The people in the $75 luxury seats would be required to pay an additional $50, because they obviously have far too much money to spend.
The people driving by the stadium who could not afford tickets to the game would each be refunded $10—even though they did not buy tickets—because they need the most assistance.
If this story doesn’t any make sense, please contact your local Senator or Representative for further clarification.
SOURCE: Gwinnett-Online.com (7 February 2003).
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER (classic version)
Once upon a time, there was an ant and a grasshopper that lived in a beautiful meadow.
The ant worked hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thought the ant a fool for working so hard while he laughed, danced, and played the summer away.
When winter came, the ant was warm and well fed, but the grasshopper had no food or shelter so he died out in the cold.
Moral of the story: Be responsible for yourself!
THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER (modern version)
Once upon a time, there was an ant and a grasshopper that lived in a beautiful meadow.
The ant worked hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thought the ant a fool for working so hard while he laughed, danced, and played the summer away.
When winter came, the shivering grasshopper called a press conference demanding to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others (like himself) were cold and starving.
MSNBC, CNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, and FOX all showed up to film the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America was stunned by the sharp contrast between the two insects.
How could this be, that in a country of such abundant wealth and opportunity, this poor grasshopper was allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appeared on Oprah with the grasshopper and everyone in the audience cried as they all held hands and sang, “It’s Not Easy Being Green.” Civil rights “activists” staged a demonstration in front of the ant’s house while the mainstream media filmed the group singing “We shall overcome.” Then one of the activists had the group kneel down and pray to God on behalf of the grasshopper.
Politicians pontificated in media interviews that the ant had gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and called for Congress to pass an immediate tax hike on the ant to force him pay his “fair share.”
Finally, the EEOC drafted the “Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act”, retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant was fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home was confiscated by the government.
A high-profile attorney, motivated solely by the “injustice of it all”, represented the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case was tried before a panel of federal judges that were appointed because of their ability to “empathize.”
The ant lost the case.
The story ended with the grasshopper finishing the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he lived in—which just happened to be the ant’s old house—crumbled around him because he was too lazy to maintain it.
The ant had disappeared in the snow.
The grasshopper was later found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, was taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorized the once peaceful neighborhood.
Moral of the story: Vote for principles over party!
SOURCE: Unknown
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
THE LITTLE RED HEN
Once upon a time a little red hen called all of her neighbors together and said, “If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?”
“Not I,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Not I,” said the pig.
“Not I,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did. In time the wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.
“Who will help me harvest the wheat?” asked the little red hen.
“I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Above my pay grade,” said the pig.
“I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did.
After the grain had been harvested and ground into flour it was time to bake the bread.
“Who will help me bake the bread?” asked the little red hen.
“That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.
“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.
“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did.
She baked five loaves of bread and after they were finished, all of her neighbors demanded that she give them some. But the little red hen said, “No, since I made the bread I shall eat all five loaves.” And so she did.
“Excess profits!” cried the cow.
“Capitalist leech!” screamed the duck.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
“I demand equal rights!” yelled the goose.
All of her neighbors painted ‘Unfair!’ picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities at her.
Then the farmer walked into the barnyard and scolded the little red hen, “You must not be so greedy.”
“But I worked hard without any help and earned the bread myself,” protested the little red hen.
“Exactly,” said the farmer. “That is what makes our free market system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as they want. But under our modern government system, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are unproductive, lazy, or idle. After all, it’s only fair.”
The little red hen smiled and clucked, “I am grateful, for now I truly understand.”
But her neighbors were upset that the little red hen never again baked bread. Instead, she signed up for the free government bread and joined her friends the cow, the duck, the pig and the goose. One by one all the bread bakers followed the example of the little red hen, and stopped baking bread. Soon there was no more bread and everyone was hungry.
The farmer smiled. Fairness and equality had finally been established in the barnyard.
SOURCE: Unknown
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize will be announced on 8 October 2010 and has been awarded 90 times to 120 Nobel Laureates between 1901 and 2009—97 times to individuals and 23 times to organizations.
In 2007, the Nobel Peace Prize was jointly awarded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert A. Gore Jr. “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.”
One of the other candidates in 2007 was Irena Sendler whose story confirms that whatever prestige and honor the prize used to hold has long since vanished. Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Historical “Snapshots” of the U.S. Economy[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]
“What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” —Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere’s Fan (1892).
| YEAR | DOW | GOLD | GDP | GDP/C | DEBT | DEBT/C |
| 1790 | N/A | $241 | $4,386,875,423 | $1,116 | $939,802,870 | $239 |
| 1795 | N/A | $241 | $6,488,261,738 | $1,422 | $1,005,609,838 | $218 |
| 1800 | N/A | $241 | $8,059,126,987 | $1,522 | $1,033,365,586 | $195 |
| 1805 | N/A | $274 | $9,698,622,272 | $1,569 | $1,161,696,546 | $185 |
| 1810 | N/A | $262 | $11,575,599,265 | $1,602 | $719,014,917 | $99 |
| 1815 | N/A | $250 | $13,968,935,571 | $1,681 | $1,153,919,786 | $137 |
| 1820 | N/A | $294 | $15,702,116,300 | $1,633 | $1,378,823,438 | $143 |
| 1825 | N/A | $363 | $19,683,747,706 | $1,771 | $1,568,523,505 | $139 |
| 1830 | N/A | $385 | $24,142,521,260 | $1,871 | $965,257,152 | $75 |
| 1835 | N/A | $425 | $30,796,366,575 | $2,065 | $692,763 | $0.04 |
| 1840 | N/A | $439 | $34,272,532,325 | $2,002 | $75,873,101 | $4 |
| 1845 | N/A | $470 | $42,646,485,981 | $2,164 | $362,419,597 | $18 |
| 1850 | N/A | $527 | $54,017,284,506 | $2,322 | $1,616,322,442 | $70 |
| 1855 | N/A | $470 | $75,898,282,703 | $2,737 | $809,404,713 | $30 |
| 1860 | N/A | $488 | $89,444,544,406 | $2,838 | $1,529,904,609 | $49 |
| 1865 | N/A | $451 | $114,663,358,917 | $3,259 | $37,134,898,704 | $1,061 |
| 1870 | N/A | $398 | $122,309,616,327 | $3,065 | $41,575,361,238 | $1,078 |
| 1875 | N/A | $459 | $153,162,629,915 | $3,367 | $43,099,770,591 | $971 |
| 1880 | N/A | $454 | $208,955,580,411 | $4,157 | $46,548,912,427 | $928 |
| 1885 | 35.59 | $487 | $251,076,992,154 | $4,395 | $43,941,224,812 | $777 |
| 1890 | 39.75 | $487 | $347,591,519,549 | $5,512 | $36,590,250,524 | $581 |
| 1895 | 32.77 | $526 | $369,564,024,459 | $5,274 | $42,651,905,505 | $613 |
| 1900 | 48.45 | $526 | $460,630,634,300 | $6,053 | $54,378,808,846 | $714 |
| 1905 | 60.55 | $487 | $563,420,997,132 | $6,722 | $53,617,960,880 | $637 |
| 1910 | 62.99 | $470 | $581,467,428,285 | $6,292 | $60,318,478,794 | $654 |
| 1915 | 76.92 | $433 | $619,669,302,464 | $6,163 | $64,066,975,763 | $646 |
| 1920 | 88.32 | $219 | $749,161,106,440 | $7,037 | $275,536,236,166 | $2,599 |
| 1925 | 137.2 | $251 | $922,462,838,898 | $7,964 | $248,981,243,388 | $2,172 |
| 1930 | 225.79 | $263 | $972,585,641,249 | $7,895 | $206,005,447,421 | $1,672 |
| 1935 | 122.58 | $541 | $942,301,276,524 | $7,399 | $443,971,603,196 | $3,346 |
| 1940 | 132.32 | $530 | $1,271,180,762,515 | $9,621 | $650,207,183,543 | $4,574 |
| 1945 | 173.93 | $413 | $2,192,239,409,106 | $15,667 | $3,050,907,202,198 | $20,105 |
| 1950 | 216.14 | $309 | $2,185,267,469,026 | $14,407 | $2,268,652,413,705 | $14,063 |
| 1955 | 439.58 | $277 | $2,723,740,903,691 | $16,480 | $2,173,784,142,097 | $12,399 |
| 1960 | 625.76 | $251 | $3,083,885,183,482 | $17,061 | $2,051,117,947,708 | $10,834 |
| 1965 | 904.93 | $236 | $3,932,718,888,300 | $20,236 | $2,134,880,316,322 | $10,605 |
| 1970 | 736.58 | $199 | $4,651,482,335,988 | $22,680 | $2,026,669,282,078 | $9,501 |
| 1975 | 755.52 | $637 | $5,315,559,628,669 | $24,611 | $2,102,463,441,758 | $9,348 |
| 1980 | 879.65 | $1,574 | $6,360,805,957,946 | $27,932 | $2,332,769,400,854 | $9,862 |
| 1985 | 1,369.03 | $625 | $7,461,392,061,614 | $31,284 | $3,586,876,399,170 | $14,485 |
| 1990 | 2,708.05 | $624 | $8,751,854,595,915 | $34,982 | $5,240,424,307,377 | $20,256 |
| 1995 | 4,524.28 | $537 | $9,906,364,298,643 | $37,160 | $6,934,410,332,163 | $25,210 |
| 2000 | 10,689.22 | $346 | $12,229,218,647,698 | $43,303 | $6,999,473,159,250 | $24,018 |
| 2005 | 10,476.46 | $486 | $12,638,400,000,000 | $42,697 | $8,641,621,318,539 | $28,777 |
| 2010* | 10,489.53 | $1,180 | $14,684,000,000,000 | $47,613 | $13,251,918,949,824 | $42,970 |
[2] Samuel H. Williamson, “Daily Closing Value of the Dow Jones Average, 1885 to Present,” MeasuringWorth (2008). URL http://www.measuringworth.org/DJA/.
[3] Lawrence H. Officer, “The Price of Gold, 1257-2009,” MeasuringWorth (2010). URL http://www.measuringworth.org/gold/.
[4] Lawrence H. Officer, “What Was the U.S. GDP Then?,” MeasuringWorth (2010). URL http://www.measuringworth.org/usgdp/.
[5] URL http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm.
[6] U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Current Population Reports,” Series P-25, Nos. 311, 917, 1095 released on 4 June 1999. URL http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/decennial/. NOTE: To reach an approximate value for the five-year spans between the official U.S. Census reports, the populations were averaged to obtain a general figure.
[7] The pre-1975 data was taken from the Consumer Price Index statistics, “Historical Statistics of the United States” (USGPO, 1975). All post-1975 data was taken from the annual Statistical Abstracts of the United States. URL http://www.westegg.com/inflation/.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Perhaps the statistics cited in Parts 1, 2, and 3 should come as no surprise considering the following institutions of “higher learning” sanction general education standards that DO NOT REQUIRE the study of U.S. History/Government…[1]
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Thomas Jefferson once remarked, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free…it expects what never was and never will be.”[1] The freedom that Jefferson spoke of is imperiled by a growing ignorance of America’s heritage as evidenced by our collective historical amnesia.[2] [3] It is absolutely crucial for the future prosperity (and longevity) of our great nation that today’s college students [read our nation’s future leaders] become sufficiently grounded in their nation’s history and founding principles. Higher education must do more than simply produce expensive degrees to display on an office wall; it must produce informed and engaged citizens who are capable of assuming the larger responsibility of guiding America’s destiny.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), “the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, and U.S. history.”
“Since NAEP assessments are administered uniformly using the same sets of test booklets across the nation, NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and selected urban districts. The assessment stays essentially the same from year to year, with only carefully documented changes. This permits NAEP to provide a clear picture of student academic progress over time.”
Although the real-world value of standardized test scores remains dubious at best, it serves as an accurate baseline from which to evaluate, using its own preferred method of measurement, the results of public school education. Continue Reading »
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
1. How much does the state government(s) spend on the public school system?
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)… [1] [2]
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
With a seemingly insatiable appetite for taxpayer dollars, it would appear that Congress has forsaken their solemn obligation to the People to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and in particular, the sections that restrain their spending.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Considering Congress’ low approval ratings, lengthy criminal history, and profligate spending, are they actually worth their collective salaries?
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Comedian Dennis Miller once remarked that, “Politicians are people whose deepest, darkest secrets should prohibit them from seeking higher office.” In fact, as the inestimable Mark Twain wryly noted, “It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.” [1]
NOTE: Several expulsion proceedings initiated by the Senate failed to result in actual expulsion. In the majority of these cases, expulsion motions were unable to secure the necessary two-thirds vote; in other instances during the proceedings, the Senator in question resigned, died, or his term simply expired.
The United States Constitution (Article 1, Section 5) gives the House of Representatives the power to expel any member by a two-thirds vote. Expulsion of a Representative is rare: only five members of the House have been expelled in its history. Three of those five were expelled in 1861 for joining the Confederate States of America.
However, the House has other but less severe measures with which to discipline members. “Censure” and “reprimand” are procedures in which the House may vote to express formal disapproval of a member’s conduct. Only a simple majority vote is required. Members who are censured must stand in the well of the House chamber to receive a reading of the censure resolution. A “reprimand” was once considered synonymous with censure, but in 1976 the House defined a reprimand as a less severe punishment. Members who are reprimanded are not required to stand in the well of the house and have the resolution read to them.
Since the politicians of both political parties are so “well-represented” on the list that follows…should we be concerned by how long it is? (Mark Grossman’s list is A LOT longer). Doesn’t the country envisioned by our Framers deserve better? [2] [3] [4]
FROM 1790 TO 1850…
FROM 1851 TO 1875…
FROM 1876 TO 1900…
FROM 1900 TO 1925…
FROM 1926 TO 1950…
FROM 1951 TO 1975…
FROM 1976 TO 2000…
FROM 2000 TO 2010…
[1] Mark Twain, Following the Equator: A Journey Around the World (Hartford, CT: The American Publishing Company, 1897), Part 1
[2] Mark Grossman, Political Corruption in America, An Encyclopedia of Scandal, Power, and Greed (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2003).
[3] Jonathan J. Cooper, “Members of Congress Charged With a Crime, 1798 – 2008”, The Washington Independent (29 July 2008); Lawrence Delevingne, “The Most Corrupt Members of Congress”, Business Insider (18 September 2009).
[4] Jack Maskell, “Expulsion, Censure, Reprimand, and Fine: Legislative Discipline in the House of Representatives”, Congressional Research Service (16 April 2002); Jack Maskell, “Recall of Legislators and the Removal of Members of Congress from Office”, Congressional Research Service (20 March 2003).
[5] Matthew Murray, “Buchanan Faces Another Lawsuit,” Roll Call (2 June 2008).
[6] Ray Long & Ashley Rueff, “Roland Burris Asked ex-Rod Blagojevich Aide About Senate Seat”, Chicago Tribune (9 January 2009).
[7] Carol D. Leonnig, “7 on defense panel scrutinized: Separate probes focus on ties to lobbying firm founded by Hill aide”, Washington Post (30 October 2009).
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
If your approval rating was this low at your job…would you still have one? Congress does.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
“But the whole thing, after all, may be put very simply. I believe that it is better to tell the truth than to lie. I believe that it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe that it is better to know than to be ignorant.” —H. L. Mencken (1880 – 1956)
DISCLAIMER: It should be obvious to anyone who has bothered to read the historical record that Europeans/Americans have mistreated–sometimes brutally–the North American Indians. However, that is not the whole story.
compiled and edited by Daniel Hagadorn
“If you have a long enough lever, you can move the world.” –Archimedes (c.287 BC – c.212 BC)
One of the most powerful “levers” of our modern era is the influence currently wielded by the mainstream media, whose political bias will be examined below…[1]
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Most law-abiding citizens acknowledge the unfortunate necessity of paying taxes, but since the Civil War era, our government has advanced decidedly unconstitutional policies that would appall the Framers, who never envisioned a tax system like the one we presently “enjoy.”
“To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the miss-managers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers… And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for [another]…till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery… And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.”[1]
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
America’s rapidly disappearing middle-class will likely be the next “species” placed on the endangered list. Only a century ago, life was very different for the middle-class who enjoyed unprecedented prosperity and a first-rate standard of living. In fact, the middle-class lifestyle of yesteryear would today be more accurately described as upper-class.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
…THE U.S. GOVERNMENT WILL TELL YOU WHAT YOU THINK?
“All government, in its essence, is a conspiracy against the superior man: its one permanent object is to oppress him and cripple him. If it be aristocratic in organization, then it seeks to protect the man who is superior only in law against the man who is superior in fact; if it be democratic, then it seeks to protect the man who is inferior in every way against both. One of its primary functions is to regiment men by force, to make them as much alike as possible and as dependent upon one another as possible, to search out and combat originality among them. All it can see in an original idea is potential change, and hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are.”[1]
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
…ON WHAT BASIS WAS OUR GOVERNMENT CONCEIVED AND FROM WHERE DOES IT DERIVE IT’S AUTHORITY?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”[1]
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
Charley Reese, “Looking for someone to blame? Congress is a good place to start,” Orlando Sentinel Star (7 March 1985)[1]
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don’t write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don’t set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don’t control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
…If you were a contemporary of Jesus Christ and began spending $1 million every day from the time of His death until now…you would still not have spent $1 trillion.
…If you laid one trillion dollar bills end to end, it would form a chain that stretched from the earth to the moon and back again 200 times.
…A military jet flying at the speed of sound—trailing out a roll of dollar bills behind it—would fly for 14 years before reaching $1 trillion.
…Using $100 dollar bills, $1 trillion would be stacked 224 feet wide, 432 feet long, and 7 feet high and would cover approximately 2.2 acres (an area considerably larger than a football field). [1]
…Put another way, one million seconds equals 11.5 days—one billion seconds equals 32 years—and one trillion seconds equals 32,000 years.
compiled & edited by Daniel Hagadorn
“I, however, place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared.”[1]
| EVENT | YEAR | COST[2] [3] | COST (2009 USD)[4] |
| Revolutionary War | 1775-1783 | $101,000,000 | $1,258,000,000 |
| Louisiana Purchase* | 1803 | $23,000,000 | $324,600,000 |
| War of 1812 | 1812-1815 | $90,000,000 | $1,040,200,000 |
| Mexican-American War | 1846-1849 | $71,000,000 | $1,808,500,000 |
| Civil War (North/South) | 1861-1865 | $4,183,000,000 | $57,947,000,000 |
| World War I | 1917-1921 | $20,000,000,000 | $237,800,000,000 |
| New Deal | 1933-1937 | $32,000,000,000 | $473,100,000,000 |
| World War II | 1941-1945 | $296,000,000,000 | $3,491,000,000,000 |
| Marshall Plan[5] | 1947-1951 | $25,000,000,000 | $204,200,000,000 |
| Korean War | 1950-1953 | $30,000,000,000 | $238,000,000,000 |
| NASA (includes all spending to date) | 1958- | $416,700,000,000 | $851,200,000,000 |
| Vietnam War | 1965-1975 | $111,000,000,000 | $437,700,000,000 |
| “Race to the Moon” | 1969 | $36,400,000,000 | $211,000,000,000 |
| S&L Crisis | 1986-1991 | $160,100,000,000 | $249,000,000,000 |
| Persian Gulf War | 1990-1991 | $61,000,000,000 | $949,000,000,000 |
| Afghanistan (includes all spending to date) | 2001- | $159,000,000,000 | $171,000,000,000 |
| Post-9/11 Domestic Security (Operation Noble Eagle) | 2001- | $28,000,000,000 | $33,000,000,000 |
| Iraq War (includes all spending to date) | 2003- | $616,000,000,000 | $648,000,000,000 |
| TOTAL | $8,256,378,300,000 | ||
| The “Bailout”[6] | $8,500,000,000,000 | ||
*Includes total amount paid in annual installments with interest
[2] Stephen Daggett, “Costs of Major U.S. Wars,” Defense Policy and Budgets Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress RS22926 (24 July 2008). URL http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/costs_of_major_us_wars.htm
[3] URL http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/big-bailouts-bigger-bucks/
[4] Consumer Price Index statistics are taken from Historical Statistics of the United States (USGPO, 1975) and the annual Statistical Abstracts of the United States.
[5] In the years between the end of WWII and before the implementation of the Marshall Plan, America gave $12 billion in financial aid to Europe.
[6] Paul Joseph Watson, “Cost Of Bailout Hits $8.5 Trillion,” PrisonPlanet.com (26 November 2008); Kathleen Pounder, “Government Bailout Hits $8.5 Trillion,” San Francisco Chronicle (26 November 2008); Jeanne Cummings, “Bailout Tops $8 Trillion,” Politico (16 December 2008); Peter Cohan, “How’s That $8 Trillion Bailout Going?,” Blogging Stocks (6 January 2009); Cord Blomquist, “Just How Much is $13 Trillion?,” OpenMarket.org (12 February 2009).
