Gay Patriot Header Image

What Would Thomas Jefferson Do?

If The Great American Philosopher were here, watching the State of Our Union I do believe he would reflect upon words he wrote hundreds of years ago:

1775 June 26-July 6. “Our attachment to no nation upon earth should supplant our attachment to liberty.” (Declaration of the Causes and Necessity for Taking Up Arms, B.1.215)

1787 Nov. 13. “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” (to W. S. Smith, B.12.356)

I recalled the ‘tree of liberty’ quote when I wrote the James O’Keefe piece yesterday.  While luckily no blood was shed, I would submit that O’Keefe did spare some of his individual liberty in the cause of the greater good:  protecting the rest of ours.

If only all of us were as brave to stand up to the tyrannical Federal Government that has taken so much of our freedoms away for the past several decades.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

20 Comments

  1. It just gets more and more obscene. Using Thomas Jefferson to justify sleazy political pranks, such as messing with a Senator’s phones. And imagining that this was an effort to secure our liberty? Frikken unbelievable!!

    Comment by Tano — January 28, 2010 @ 9:43 am - January 28, 2010

  2. Tano as usual misses the point: that Jefferson would be revolted (bad pun intended) by the bloated, tyrannous, social-fascist mess that America has become.

    (And that Tano supports, in his relentless support for Obama. In other words: Jefferson would be revolted by Tano.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 28, 2010 @ 10:19 am - January 28, 2010

  3. Pete Williams of NBC is being quoted on MSNBC:

    From NBC’s Pete Williams

    A law enforcement official says the four men arrested for attempting to tamper with the phones in the New Orleans office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) were not trying to intercept or wiretap the calls.

    Instead, the official says, the men, led by conservative videomaker James O’Keefe, wanted to see how her local office staff would respond if the phones were inoperative. They were apparently motivated, the official says, by criticism that when Sen. Landrieu became a big player in the health care debate, people in Louisiana were having a hard time getting through on the phones to register their views.

    That is, the official says, what led the four men to pull this stunt — to see how the local staffers would react if the phones went out. Would the staff just laugh it off, or would they express great concern that local folks couldn’t get through?

    Comment by heliotrope — January 28, 2010 @ 10:30 am - January 28, 2010

  4. ILC – Facist mess that america has BECOME?

    http://www.holysmoke.org/kh/kh582.htm
    ‘A man who made a remark about a “burning Bush” during the president’s March 2001 trip to Sioux Falls was sentenced Friday to 37 months in prison.’

    You’ve been ruled by facists for years.

    Comment by themselves — January 28, 2010 @ 11:00 am - January 28, 2010

  5. And of course lets not forget Tano’s howling condemnation of the (in)Justice department and their dismissing of convictions (not charges, convictions) against the NBP, their ignoring of congressional subpeonas…

    Oh wait, the little fascist doesn’t mind when the government and their allies break laws? Never mind.

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 28, 2010 @ 11:02 am - January 28, 2010

  6. Actually, TJ wouldn’t disapprove, but not for the reasons you think. In TJ’s time there was no concept of privacy in communication, at least not by our standard, that we take for granted today. Letters and communiques were routinely intercepted and read by third parties, and everyone knew it. It is one of the reasons why the bulk of the surviving letters from that period are so civil. Also, your definition, or metric if you will, of political corruption is not the same as that in TJ’s day. What she has done that you define as corrupt, which is ill-defined and, if it’s just the health care bribe – quite legal, would hardly raise an eyebrow in TJ’s time. There was certainly as much political skuldugary in his time as there is now.

    That said, there are two ways TJ would view this. If ML were a political opponent of the likes of Alexander Hamilton or Aaron Burr, TJ, being the political animal he was, would certainly approve of O’Keefe’s actions. If ML were a compatriot of his… he would be outraged and demand justice. TJ is the father of the political party after all.

    PS. Anyone who wants to get to know TJ beyond the famous quotes, this is a great resource – The Thomas Jefferson Hour. It’s an hour long show where show creator Clay Jenkinson becomes TJ and is interviewed by host David Swenson. Clay J has been portraying TJ for over twenty years and knows the guy inside and out. Oh, and the shows are not scripted and CJ doesn’t know the Q’s or subject of the show beforehand. The show can be heard either on your local NPR station, or you can download it via iTunes or even from the website. I have been listening for years, and i must

    Comment by Sonicfrog — January 28, 2010 @ 11:19 am - January 28, 2010

  7. Oh, and countdown to Tano condemning these lawbreakers in five…. four…

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 28, 2010 @ 11:31 am - January 28, 2010

  8. ILC – Facist mess that america has BECOME?

    Become since the time of Thomas Jefferson, the subject of the post.

    Tano, seriously – How dumb are you? I mean, how much have I got to explain to you?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 28, 2010 @ 11:32 am - January 28, 2010

  9. It just gets more and more obscene. Using Thomas Jefferson to justify sleazy political pranks, such as messing with a Senator’s phones. And imagining that this was an effort to secure our liberty? Frikken unbelievable!!

    Tano, you, Barack Obama, the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Obama Party are all up in arms over allegedly “messing with a Senator’s phones”….. but obstruct, deny, and drop charges against people who were observed by several witnesses and caught on film standing outside a polling place threatening voters with racial epithets and weapons.

    And this is where we hammer the Tano thug, folks. He supports this. He needs to explain why he, his Barack Obama, the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Obama Party do not see a single thing wrong with people standing outside a polling place threatening voters with racial epithets and weapons.

    The little thug is going to try to dodge that one left and right, because there is no good answer. His Obama dropped the charges. His Obama made it clear that there was nothing wrong with this behavior. His Obama acted to protect the criminals who were doing this in clear violation of the law.

    Put bluntly, his Obama and his Obama Party release criminals who openly violate the Voting Rights Act while trying to send to Federal prison people who pull what even Tano admits is not a crime, but a “sleazy political prank”.

    This should go on the main page, Bruce. Everyone, every single liberal who dares to criticize this should explain why the same FBI, the same DOJ, the same Obama administration, and the same Obama Party released Obama partisans who were caught on film committing a criminal act without a single charge, but are demanding Federal prison terms for people whose crime they can’t even define.

    That is what we are dealing with here. Tano and his disgusting thug ilk expect us to stand idly by while they openly threaten voters and abuse the powers of the Presidency to do it without charges or repercussions.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 28, 2010 @ 12:03 pm - January 28, 2010

  10. Tano and his disgusting thug ilk expect us to stand idly by….

    That is because they have no standards and love to chide people who hold themselves to standards. “What would Jesus do?” says the misfit who regards Jesus as a wayward Jew who was one cut below Elmer Gantry.

    The Tano code of justice, morality and ethics would be limited to one entry: “Whatever works.”

    Comment by heliotrope — January 28, 2010 @ 12:29 pm - January 28, 2010

  11. ILC,

    “Tano, seriously – How dumb are you? I mean, how much have I got to explain to you?”

    I did not make the comment that you were responding to here.

    But do lets go back to your original comment:
    “..that Jefferson would be revolted (bad pun intended) by the bloated, tyrannous, social-fascist mess that America has become.”

    Hmmm. Personally, I love America, and think we have the best political system that I know of. But I do urge you to seek out, and transport yourself to some less tyrannous, social-fascist society. Maybe Somalia would be more to your liking.

    Comment by Tano — January 28, 2010 @ 12:56 pm - January 28, 2010

  12. Nice try, Tano.

    The difference between you and ILC is that not only does ILC know better, he knows that the United States CAN be better.

    Socialist moochers like yourself and your Barack Obama have no interest other than sustaining your parasitic existence on other peoples’ tax dollars. That is why you and Barack Obama both support criminal intimidation of voters, for example; you oppose our democracy and want to permanently ensconce yourself in power so that you can coerce us into giving you everything.

    Taking away the right of people to vote makes the United States worse, not better. Why do you and your Barack Obama support that, Tano?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 28, 2010 @ 1:42 pm - January 28, 2010

  13. Forget the right to vote, how about the right to know?

    People, the administration argued they have the right to ban books if they mention an elected official. Four Justices found that ok!

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 28, 2010 @ 3:14 pm - January 28, 2010

  14. Personally, I love America,

    I certainly don’t get that from your comments and while your lips are firmly planted on the nutsack of the Incompetent Boob in Chief.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 28, 2010 @ 3:53 pm - January 28, 2010

  15. Taking away the right of people to vote makes the United States worse, not better

    NDT: even if we restrict the Tano’s right to vote? and thus minimizing the Obamanation?

    How about limiting the vote to taxpayers, or property owners? Those who have a VESTED interest in the outcome, instead of their income stream from the government teat?

    Comment by Jax Dancer — January 28, 2010 @ 5:28 pm - January 28, 2010

  16. How about limiting the vote to taxpayers, or property owners? Those who have a VESTED interest in the outcome, instead of their income stream from the government teat?

    I’m not necessarily opposed to that theory. :) But the way I would make it accessible is that EVERYONE pays taxes.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 28, 2010 @ 5:47 pm - January 28, 2010

  17. I’ve been meaning to write this for a long time, and I guess this post is the one that broke the camel’s proverbial back.

    -Rant On-

    Jesus H Christ People.

    I don’t believe you guys. Bruce opens up a wonderful opportunity to discuss and compare the thoughts and philosophies of the founding fathers and compare how they might pertain to the world today, and all you guys can do is bicker between each other, throwing out one ad-hom after another, and act like retards. i’ve been a GP’er since April 2005, and man, the level of thought provoking discourse has really waned on the last year or so.

    Can we stop behaving like grade school children and actually reflect on something instead of just lashing out at everything that moves?

    -/Rant Off-

    PS. I really miss Rai.

    Comment by Sonicfrog — January 29, 2010 @ 12:07 pm - January 29, 2010

  18. Didn’t think there was much lashing.

    We still aren’t clear (even with O’Keefe’s statement) what he was actually doing. We can still wait for more data to come out.

    Jefferson, Hamilton, et. al. did not revolt at the first sign of irreconcilable differences with England. The revolution was the end result of exhausting every available diplomatic recourse. I’d like to think that his reaction would be, “We’re not there yet.”

    At the same time, I think he’d like to see the candidates attack more, if the mudslinging is any sign.

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 29, 2010 @ 12:46 pm - January 29, 2010

  19. ILC, I did not make the comment that you were responding to here.

    Since sockpuppets are a real possibility and I have seen you be capable of anything, Tano, I don’t accept that as an absolute fact. But yes, I was in a hurry and I did read a comment incorrectly. I apologize for that error.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 29, 2010 @ 5:59 pm - January 29, 2010

  20. discuss and compare the thoughts and philosophies of the founding fathers and compare how they might pertain to the world today

    They all vibrantly apply and should be kept at the fore. Which Federalist Paper has proven to be misdirected and a damaging concept?

    But I do not quite get the idea behind examining how they might pertain so much as hearing out those who claim they do not pertain.

    For that, we have to wait for Tano and the charging herd of rabid lemmings who chatter on about ships and shoes and sealing wax and cabbages and kings.

    I am also unaware of what the “H” stands for in the Lord’s name.

    Comment by heliotrope — January 30, 2010 @ 11:48 am - January 30, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.