Saturday, December 15, 2012

Thank Jefferson for the Bill of Rights


Happy Bill of Rights Day!




On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights became part of the US Constitution. Four years earlier, on December 20, 1787, Thomas Jefferson, who was then serving as ambassador to France, wrote to James Madison, "A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference."

“The following letter of December 20, 1787, to James Madison, helped to convince the latter that the Constitution needed such an addition.”- Britannica

"Madison’s mentor Thomas Jefferson… helped convince him of [the Bill of Rights] necessity..." – History.com

"The American Bill of Rights, inspired by Jefferson…” – ACLU, The Bill of Rights: A Brief History

Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government - The Bill of Rights

"I disapproved from the first moment... the want of a bill of rights [in the new Constitution] to guard liberty against the legislative as well as the executive branches of the government." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789. ME 7:300

"I do not like... the omission of a bill of rights providing clearly and without the aid of sophisms for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, protection against standing armies, restriction against monopolies, the eternal and unremitting force of the habeas corpus laws, and trials by jury in all matters of fact triable by the laws of the land and not by the law of nations." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:387

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:388, Papers 12:440
 

Basic Contents of a Bill of Rights


"By a declaration of rights, I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies, trial by juries in all cases, no suspensions of the habeas corpus, no standing armies. These are fetters against doing evil which no honest government should decline." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Donald, 1788. ME 6:425

"The Constitutions of our several States vary more or less in some particulars. But there are certain principles in which all agree, and which all cherish as vitally essential to the protection of the life, liberty, property, and safety of the citizen: 1. Freedom of religion, restricted only from acts of trespass on that of others; 2. Freedom of person, securing every one from imprisonment or other bodily restraint but by the laws of the land. This is effected by the well-know law of habeas corpus; 3. Trial by jury, the best of all safeguards for the person, the property, and the fame of every individual; 4. The exclusive right of legislation and taxation in the representatives of the people; 5. Freedom of the press, subject only to liability for personal injuries." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:489

"I like [the declaration of rights] as far as it goes, but I should have been for going further. For instance, the following alterations and additions would have pleased me:

Article 4. The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or otherwise to publish anything but false facts affecting injuriously the life, liberty, property or reputation of others, or affecting the peace of the confederacy with foreign nations.

Article 7. All facts put in issue before any judicature shall be tried by jury except, 1, in cases of admiralty jurisdiction, wherein a foreigner shall be interested; 2, in cases cognizable before a court martial concerning only the regular officers and soldiers of the United States, or members of the militia in actual service in time of war or insurrection; and 3, in impeachments allowed by the Constitution.

Article 8. No person shall be held in confinement more than -- days after he shall have demanded and been refused a writ of habeas corpus by the judge appointed by law, nor more than -- days after such a writ shall have been served on the person holding him in confinement, and no order given on due examination for his remandment or discharge, nor more than -- hours in any place at a greater distance than -- miles from the usual residence of some judge authorized to issue the writ of habeas corpus; nor shall that writ be suspended for any term exceeding one year, nor in any place more than -- miles distant from the State or encampment of enemies or of insurgents.

Article 9. Monopolies may be allowed to persons for their own productions in literature, and their own inventions in the arts, for a term not exceeding -- years, but for no longer term, and no other purpose.

Article 10. All troops of the United States shall stand ipso facto disbanded at the expiration of the term for which their pay and subsistence shall have been last voted by Congress, and all officers and soldiers not natives of the United States shall be incapable of serving in their armies by land, except during a foreign war.

These restrictions, I think, are so guarded as to hinder evil only. However, if we do not have them now, I have so much confidence in my countrymen as to be satisfied that we shall have them as soon as the degeneracy of our government shall render them necessary." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:450

More Jefferson quotes here: http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/ThomasJefferson/jeff0950.htm
 

The Endeavor to Secure Rights


"[If] a positive declaration of some essential rights could not be obtained in the requisite latitude, [the] answer [is], Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:310

"The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, [and] we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Clay, 1790. ME 8:4

"Instead of that liberty which takes root and growth in the progress of reason, if recovered by mere force or accident, it becomes with an unprepared people a tyranny still of the many, the few, or the one." --Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1815. ME 14:245

"Most [revolutions] have been [closed] by a subversion of that liberty [they were] intended to establish." --Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1784. ME 4:218, Papers 7:106

"In endeavors to improve our situation, we should never despair." --Thomas Jefferson to John Quincy Adams, 1817. ME 15:148

"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government; I mean an additional article taking from the Federal Government the power of borrowing. I now deny their power of making paper money or anything else a legal tender. I know that to pay all proper expenses within the year would, in case of war, be hard on us. But not so hard as ten wars instead of one. For wars could be reduced in that proportion; besides that the State governments would be free to lend their credit in borrowing quotas." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1798. ME 10:64

Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government - The National Debt  


 
Posted by at

48 comments:

  1. Ilyn RossDecember 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

    "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can." - Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, March 15,1789

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch14s49.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ilyn RossDecember 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM

    Removing the slavery clause in the Declaration of Independence when SC decided it would scuttle the Resolution of Independence if the slavery clause was not removed was not a compromise. It showed that in a hierarchy of values, the highest value comes first. King George III obtruded slavery on the colonies. Jefferson's first bill as a legislator, age 26, is the "permission of the emancipation of slaves", and he also filed a bill to end the slave trade. Freeing the colonies from British rule was a higher prority. Failing to do so meant that slavery would continue - slavery of blacks as well as whites.

    "The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, [and] we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good." - Thomas Jefferson

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ilyn RossDecember 28, 2012 at 2:25 AM

    Removing the slavery clause in the Declaration of Independence when SC decided it would scuttle the Resolution of Independence if the slavery clause was not removed was not a compromise. It showed that in a hierarchy of values, the highest value comes first. King George III obtruded slavery on the colonies. Jefferson's first bill as a legislator, age 26, is the "permission of the emancipation of slaves", and he also filed a bill to end the slave trade. Freeing the colonies from British rule was a higher prority. Failing to do so meant that slavery would continue - slavery of blacks as well as whites.

    "The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, [and] we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good.... Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can." - Thomas Jefferson

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/at-age-26-jefferson-submitted.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ilyn RossJanuary 1, 2013 at 5:13 AM

    Bill of Rights fb photo:

    http://www.facebook.com/ilyn.ross?ref=tn_tnmn#!/photo.php?fbid=458533354194920&set=a.133302776717981.22097.100001147782952&type=1&theater

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ilyn RossJanuary 1, 2013 at 8:29 AM

    On January 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson expounded on the meaning of freedom, which is the separation of wielders of legal coercive power (i.e. government/state) and the people. Four years before the Bill of Rights became part of the US Constitution, Jefferson, then serving as ambassador to France, convinced James Madison to include the Bill of Rights.

    "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

    http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ilyn RossJanuary 26, 2013 at 7:53 AM

    Rights are unobstructed actions according to every person's will, actions that can be exercised without anyone's permission, limited only by the equal rights of other people.

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ilyn RossJanuary 26, 2013 at 7:56 AM

    Rights are unobstructed actions according to every person's will, actions that can be exercised without anyone's permission, limited only by the equal rights of other people.

    "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." – Thomas Jefferson

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ilyn RossJanuary 27, 2013 at 6:45 PM

    “We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable;
    That all men are created equal & independent,
    That from that equal creation
    They derive rights inherent & inalienable,
    Among which are the preservation of
    Life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness…”

    - Thomas Jefferson

    http://ilynross.blogspot.com/2011/01/jeffersonian.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ilyn RossFebruary 3, 2013 at 5:48 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ilyn RossFebruary 3, 2013 at 5:50 AM

    The price of DARK-AGES warrioring is Obama as well as Soros. The price of continued DARK-AGES warrioring could be Civil War II. God gifted man with free will, but DARK-AGES warriors spurn it. THEY ADVOCATE COERCION in the name their god.

    The rationale for the wall of separation between church and state is crystal, but it cannot penetrate the minds of those who have renounced reason. Government/State is legal force, and free humans should not be forced. In freedom, legal force should be used only to secure rights. Legal force should not be used on rights respecters. The FREEDOM WALL separates the free (citizens) from the chained (wielders of legal coercive power).

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ilyn RossFebruary 10, 2013 at 8:49 AM

    Government is FORCE. Rights dictate that government cannot prevent the people from non-rights-violating speech and use of arms. The GOOD understand that the same freedom principle prevents a rights-based government from interfering with the uterus, bedroom, free will, and civil unions.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ilyn RossFebruary 10, 2013 at 5:53 PM

    "Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, 'a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;' the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination." - Thomas Jefferson

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ilyn RossFebruary 14, 2013 at 1:17 AM

    It took the man who uttered "wall of separation between Church & State", then away serving as ambassador to France, to argue for a Bill of Rights.

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    On January 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson expounded on the meaning of freedom, which is the separation of wielders of legal coercive power (i.e. government/state) and the people. "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

    http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ilyn RossFebruary 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM

    John Adams was not as integrated as glorious Thomas Jefferson, but I salute John Adams, I am and will be forever thankful, that he set out to achieve a Resolution for Independence, against overwhelming odds, and succeeded.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAfjiUZEU94

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ilyn RossFebruary 16, 2013 at 10:25 AM

    "In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to COERCION or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles, his main hope must be that the wise and the good will rule - not merely by example, as we all must wish, but by authority given to them and enforced by them.[7] Like the socialist, he is less concerned with the problem of how the powers of government should be limited than with that of who wields them; and, LIKE the SOCIALIST, he regards himself as ENTITLED to FORCE the value he holds on other people."

    http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/articles/hayek-why-i-am-not-conservative.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ilyn RossFebruary 16, 2013 at 11:57 AM

    There are limits to rights: the equal rights of others.

    There is a wall of difference between private citizens and wielders of legal coercive power. The former can legally use only reason and persuasion while the latter can use legal force.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Ilyn RossFebruary 17, 2013 at 7:19 AM

    Jefferson was a man of science, of truth, of freedom.

    “I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” – Thomas Jefferson

    "In matters of principle, stand like a rock.... The principles on which we engaged, of which the charter of our independence is the record, were sanctioned by the laws of our being… Man [is] a rational animal, endowed by nature with rights… A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature…” -- Thomas Jefferson

    "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

    "We are bound, you, I, & every one to make common cause, even with error itself, to maintain the common right of freedom of conscience." - Thomas Jefferson

    "I am not myself apt to be alarmed at innovations recommended by reason. That dread belongs to those whose interests or prejudices shrink from the advance of truth and science." - Thomas Jefferson

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ilyn RossFebruary 18, 2013 at 10:29 AM

    Some say the zygote has rights. Others say rights are acquired at birth. I differ with both camps.

    Rights, which are rights to actions, are inherent. Since they are inherent, they are based on the entity's NATURAL ATTRIBUTES. Birth is not an attribute given by nature. In Thomas Jefferson's words, "Rights come from nature." He said that they are based on "the laws of our being." Birth does not come from nature. It is not inherent in the laws of human nature.

    A fetus has its own bodily parts. Its brain activity is separate from the Mom's. The placenta, which the fetus uses to breathe, comes from embryonic cells. A fully formed human with brain activity has acquired the NATURAL ATTRIBUTES of an ACTUAL living human. It is not birth that accords actuality.

    Rights are UNOBSTRUCTED actions according to one's will, limited only by the equal rights of others. If the Mom is in coma and life support, the fetus will continue to breathe. This evinces that the breathing of the fetus is an independent action.

    The unborn with brain activity has INHERENT NATURAL rights.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ilyn RossFebruary 24, 2013 at 7:04 AM

    "We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness;"

    http://www.princeton.edu/~tjpapers/declaration/declaration.html

    ReplyDelete
  20. Ilyn RossMarch 2, 2013 at 4:17 PM

    Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography
    1821Works 1:71

    "The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination."

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions45.html

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ilyn RossMarch 3, 2013 at 5:58 AM

    "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; IT IS FORCE." - George Washington

    Government, the state, is FORCE, yet Palin and her ilk lust to have their own religion IN BED with FORCE. The wall of separation is a freedom-fence around rights respecters, which wielders of LEGAL COERCIVE POWER should not cross.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ilyn RossMarch 10, 2013 at 4:22 AM

    On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights became part of the US Constitution. Four years earlier, on December 20, 1787, Thomas Jefferson, who was then serving as ambassador to France, wrote to James Madison, "A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference."

    http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151408812232740&set=a.93334652739.88992.92943557739&type=1&theater

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. Ilyn RossApril 20, 2013 at 12:08 PM

    Dark-Ages warriors tout that Thomas Jefferson's "wall of separation" is not in the Constitution. Theft by the government is. http://mises.org/daily/1597

    Without Jefferson, there is no Bill of Rights.

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    ReplyDelete
  24. Ilyn RossApril 20, 2013 at 12:24 PM

    Like the church, God is in the realm of REASON AND PERSUASION, not in the realm of FORCE/government.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Ilyn RossMay 4, 2013 at 6:02 AM

    Government and its agents should mind their only business, which is to secure equal inherent inalienable rights. Government holds a monopoly on legal coercive power. Since government is force, there should be a wall separating it from religion, economics, science, education, art, bedroom, uterus...

    http://www.renewamerica.com/bb/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15772

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ilyn RossMay 4, 2013 at 7:19 PM

    The wall of separation principle is very clear. Government is FORCE. This is why it should be separated from religion, science, education, economics, art, bedroom, uterus, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Ilyn RossMay 4, 2013 at 8:06 PM

    Organized religion is fair game, but as to faith held by private individuals, I am with Thomas Jefferson: "I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others."

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ilyn RossMay 12, 2013 at 7:53 AM

    "The true foundation of republican government is the equal right
    of every citizen in his person and property and in their
    management." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 4:33 AM

    Rights are inherent and inalienable, thus, not subject to a vote. Rights are UNOBSTRUCTED ACTIONS that can be exercised without anyone's permission, limited only by the equal rights of others.

    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    ReplyDelete
  30. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 4:44 AM

    "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all and always well-informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had thirteen States independent for eleven years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each State. What country before ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon, and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

    Thomas Jefferson

    Year: 1787
    Context: Letter to William S. Smith

    ReplyDelete
  31. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 9:11 AM

    "Where liberty dwells, there is my country.... God grant that not only the love of liberty but a thorough knowledge of the rights of man may pervade all the nations of the earth, so that a philosopher may set his foot anywhere on its surface and say: This is my country."

    http://mises.org/daily/1144

    ReplyDelete
  32. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 10:08 AM

    "Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, 'a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;' the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination." - Thomas Jefferson

    "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst." - Thomas Paine

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=013aa1q6QgM

    ReplyDelete
  33. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 10:12 AM

    Public does not equate to government. Churches, temples, and the kind are usually open to the PUBLIC. There are religious services shown on TV - very PUBLIC. Fox News has a priest as a contributor - this is public.

    Based on religious freedom, on the reality that government is FORCE, there should be no religion-based displays/events/policies in any GOVERNMENT setting. Based on EQUAL rights, atheists, theists, deists, Christians, Mormons, Jews, or Muslims must not be favored by the GOVERNMENT in any way.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM

    Like the church, God is in the realm of REASON AND PERSUASION, not in the realm of FORCE/government.

    "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." - signed by John Adams

    US Treaty with Tripoli
    http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html

    ReplyDelete
  35. Ilyn RossMay 19, 2013 at 1:32 PM

    George Washington hailed the “liberal policy” of the United States on religious freedom as worthy of emulation by other countries. He explained, “It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens.”

    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5593

    ReplyDelete
  36. Ilyn RossMay 26, 2013 at 7:27 AM

    "The commotions that have taken place in America, as far as they are yet known to me, offer nothing threatening. They are a proof that the people have liberty enough, and I could not wish them less than they have. If the happiness of the mass of the people can be secured at the expense of a little tempest now and then, or even of a little blood, it will be a precious purchase. 'Malo libertatem periculosam quam quietem servitutem.' Let common sense and common honesty have fair play, and they will soon set things to rights." --Thomas Jefferson to Ezra Stiles, 1786. ME 6:25

    ReplyDelete
  37. Ilyn RossJuly 13, 2013 at 6:06 AM

    Wall of separation
    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153043393760393&set=a.227642180392.268902.58709265392&type=1&theater

    ReplyDelete
  38. Ilyn RossJuly 19, 2013 at 12:13 AM

    Dear Clarence Thomas: It Happened on July 4, 1776
    by Thom Hartmann

    http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0703-09.htm

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ilyn RossOctober 28, 2013 at 3:57 PM

    In defense of oil. - http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_topic_oil

    ReplyDelete
  40. Ilyn RossOctober 28, 2013 at 3:58 PM

    "But Rockefeller was no autocrat. The standard lesson of Rockefeller’s rise is wrong—as is the traditional story of how it happened. Rockefeller did not achieve his success through the destructive, “anticompetitive” tactics attributed to him—nor could he have under economic freedom. Rockefeller had no coercive power to banish competition or to dictate consumer prices. His sole power was his earned economic power—which was no more and no less than his ability to refine crude oil to produce kerosene and other products better, cheaper, and in greater quantity than anyone thought possible."

    http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2008-summer/standard-oil-company.asp

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ilyn RossOctober 28, 2013 at 4:13 PM

    "To sum up: The entire structure of antitrust statutes in this country is a jumble of economic irrationality and ignorance. It is the product: (a) of a gross misinterpretation of history, and (b) of rather naive, and certainly unrealistic, economic theories.

    As a last resort, some people argue that at least the antitrust laws haven't done any harm. They assert that even though the competitive process itself inhibits coercive monopolies, there is no harm in making doubly sure by declaring certain economic actions to be illegal.

    But the very existence of those undefinable statutes and contradictory case law inhibits businessmen from undertaking what would otherwise be sound productive ventures. No one will ever know what new products, processes, machines, and cost-saving mergers failed to come into existence, killed by the Sherman Act before they were born. No one can ever compute the price that all of us have paid for that Act which, by inducing less effective use of capital, has kept our standard of living lower than would otherwise have been possible.

    No speculation, however, is required to assess the injustice and the damage to the careers, reputations, and lives of business executives jailed under the antitrust laws."

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-WFdJtD6G2FAyQqRY4OW7ySri0FwgAh3S479aWGFFUQ/edit

    ReplyDelete
  42. Ilyn RossOctober 28, 2013 at 4:24 PM

    "... is being condemned for being too successful, too efficient, and too good a competitor. Whatever damage the antitrust laws may have done to our economy, whatever distortions of the structure of the nation's capital they may have created, these are less disastrous than the fact that the effective purpose, the hidden intent, and the actual practice of the antitrust laws in the United States have led to the condemnation of the productive and efficient members of our society because they are productive and efficient." -Alan Greenspan

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-WFdJtD6G2FAyQqRY4OW7ySri0FwgAh3S479aWGFFUQ/edit

    ReplyDelete
  43. Ilyn RossMarch 9, 2014 at 4:43 AM

    Without the man who uttered "wall of separation", the anti freedom would be saying there are no rights mentioned in the Constitution.

    https://www.facebook.com/IlynRossJeffersonian/photos/a.1418071721738601.1073741829.1418031698409270/1422415651304208/?type=1&theater

    ReplyDelete
  44. Ilyn RossMarch 14, 2014 at 9:36 PM

    The entire article is a very good read, for several reasons -

    "In 1787, Jefferson was re-elected to a second three-year term as minister to France. Through correspondence with James Madison, he was kept up to relative speed on the progress of the Constitutional Convention, which was proceeding at Philadelphia in that same year. Jefferson was of the conservative opinion that a mere revision of the Articles of Confederation was necessary in order to increase the role of the federal government. Others, Madison most prominent among them, were for a complete overhaul, the direction of which Jefferson observed with an aloof but vested interest. He raised his loudest objections at the absence of a Bill of Rights, which he did much to shape in conjunction with Madison, and which stands beside the Constitution as a bedrock of Americas present-day political system (See the Constitution SparkNote)."

    http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/jefferson/section9.rhtml

    ReplyDelete
  45. Ilyn RossMarch 14, 2014 at 9:43 PM

    For a young nation in a world where nations had grave conflicts, it was of national security/survival that the best were sent out to the world as the nation's representatives - Jefferson, Dr. Franklin, and John Adams.

    http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/jefferson/section9.rhtml

    ReplyDelete
  46. Ilyn RossJune 8, 2014 at 3:38 AM

    Without the man who uttered the words "WALL OF SEPARATION between Church & State", DARK-AGES warriors would be saying, "There are NO RIGHTS mentioned in the Constitution."

    In 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison: "A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inferences.... I do not like... the omission of a bill of rights providing clearly and without the aid of sophisms for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, protection against standing armies, restriction against monopolies, the eternal and unremitting force of the habeas corpus laws, and trials by jury in all matters of fact triable by the laws of the land and not by the law of nations."

    ReplyDelete
  47. Ilyn RossJuly 6, 2014 at 1:04 PM

    http://www.foundersvbush.com/liberty.html

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ilyn RossMay 3, 2015 at 7:07 PM

    Without the man who explained the First Amendment with the wall of separation, the wall between wielders of legal coercive power and rights-respecters, those of the Dark-Ages would be saying there are no rights mentioned in the Constitution.


    http://jeffersonianclub.blogspot.com/2012/12/thank-jefferson-for-bill-of-rights.html

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)