Was Reagan Right? Will WE Be the Generation to Lose “IT”?


About the author: Becky is a conservative citizen activist who grew up in the 1980's Reagan era. During that time it was not unusual for American's to hear a great deal about the Cold War and to be concerned about the possibility of a nuclear war. When the Cold War ended, American entered an era of peace and prosperi ... [read 's FULL BIO]

Screen shot 2013-01-31 at 12.18.58 PM
Across America sheriffs have stated their intentions to stand with the people should Obama and his power grabbing administration pass unconstitutional laws regarding our second amendment rights.

God bless those patriots!

It must be a thorn in king Obama’s side to see that many American’s have the audacity to stand against him instead of kneeling at the altar. Maybe they weren’t expecting it. Maybe they thought there was enough reality t.v. and Hollywood debauchery to keep American’s occupied and complacent. They did not count on the sheer numbers of patriots who would wake from their slumber and recognize, finally, that they weren’t crazy, that America was being destroyed from within.

In the county in which I reside, the sheriff is elected by the people. Any citizen among us may enter that race (of the people) and the voters decide who they want to be the single most powerful law enforcement officer in the county. While I am not familiar with the rules everywhere, I will assume it is much the same all over the country. Certainly the state of Delaware holds elections for the sheriffs that hold the post in each of their three counties. Apparently no one has defined the term ‘law enforcement officer’ to Beau Biden, Attorney General in Delaware and son of foot-in-my-mouth Joe Biden. AG Biden has issued mandates to commissioners that Delaware sheriffs no longer have the power to arrest people. Fighting to represent the people who elected him is Sheriff Jeff Christopher of Sussex County.

According to Christopher he stands alone; the other two sheriffs will not stand with him. Cowards! Are they afraid to stand against Biden? Are they serving according to the will of the people? Or do political expediency and self interest trump doing the right thing?
At Gettysburg, President Lincoln made an impassioned speech regarding the sacrifices made by Americans who fought for what they believed was right.

“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
…. ┬áIt is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Before this and after, so many of our men and women died to protect what we hold so very dear. Freedom is NOT free. As Ronald Reagan warned, freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. Will we be the generation that loses it?

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • +)(+Your./nation./was./VICTORY./from./foundation./this./time./you./will./recive./more

    • Ghasem — I appreciate your commenting in this discussion, and in other discussions on the website.

      I can’t help but notice that the way you write your comments is very distinctive, with non-standard punctuation, grammar, and spelling. Can you help me understand why your comments look the way they look? I’m finding it difficult to understand the points you’re trying to make; perhaps there’s a good explanation that I’m missing.

      Thanks, Ghasem!

  • It is my firm belief that a time will come soon when we must not give up but, renew this nation in the same way the founders did

    • you may be right, It looks like its coming, Even if the new gun bans dont pass the house or senate, Obama will use his king power to put it into law, witch will be against
      the law…..

      • edc

        “Free men are not equal, and equal men are not free” all are created equal but freewill comes into play after that.

  • jq2intx

    It is time for people to awaken to the way we are going, the narcisist in chief wants to be dictator for life. He has to do a lot more to make it so, but he is working at it. Meanwhile, he destroys our ability to keep our borders secured, and destroys our ability to fight our enemies. Then we find Principals in schools making our kids recited the pledge of allegiance in Arabic, so that they are saying one nation under a false god instead of the true God of the Universe. Our nation is moving faster and faster toward its total destruction.

  • foxxybey

    Stolen elections, losing more freedoms and at the mercy of obozo-care says we have lost it, along with kicking God out of the schools and replacing Him with allah, kicking Him out of the public and we have crime all the way from the White House to the streets, I’d say we lost it.

    • NOT YET! There is still a little time for US to take back our country.
      I would hate to speculate as to what Some of the voters thought they would be getting when they voted for Obama the first time. I mean there was some room for the misconception of and about who he was/would be. But by the 2nd time there was no doubt about it unless you consider the question of his birth, and with all the steps he has taken to hide and to prevent anyone from finding evidence, I am inclined to agree that he does not have the right to be where he is.
      But all of this only reinforces his need to rig the election in his favor even to mathematically impossiblities such as over 100% of the registered Voters in a precenct voting, and in other preceints a 100% vote for obama even with registered voters from that precint stating they did NOT vote for him.
      That makes Obama a liar and a fraud and Mr Phillips this is who/what you are proud of? I think you need to examin your own morals and personal values if this is indeed what you favor.

  • rog363

    I will stand and fight, as my father did in WWII, if it means saving my country from the utter destruction I see happening to it because of the regime now in power. I say regime for as far as I can tell they aren’t an administration but a regime as were the Communists and the Nazi’s.

  • Watch this 30 minute video and consider how the message it presents is made even more frightening in light of the new hard push to confiscate our weapons.


    • Mr.Mike

      WOW, what an eye opener I new that there was something fishy about Pannetta. let alone all of the info about Obama, and their agenda to destroy our miliitary. This is a must watch people.

  • BY THE CONSTITUTION the Supreme Court is the only entity that can legitimately define the Constitution. And the Supreme Court has found that Congress can make laws that limit gun ownership and there is already a precedent of them doing so. NOBODY is proposing to take away our right to have a gun for protection. And even Ronald Reagan was a proponent of gun control. He actually passed gun control laws when he was governor of California. I want my children to live in a safe and secure country. I don’t want them to live in a new Somalia where gangs of armed thugs rule.

    • Becky Kress

      The second amendment was written for the express purpose of the people being able to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. The New Orleans gun grab proved that those who would attempt to take over our nation would come at us with guns, and they will not limit themselves to the guns our “legislators” propose to limit us to. I do not wish to be ruled by gangs of armed thugs either, whether they be tyrants or criminals. For that reason, and because I was born free and with personal liberty to choose for myself and to protect myself, I cling to my gun rights. It isn’t people like me, law abiding citizens who just want to be safe, that you have to worry about. It is those very same gangs of armed thugs who would just love to see us disarmed so that there jobs are easier and safer for them. Why in the world would we want to punish law abiding citizens and strip them of their methods of defense because of the crimes of non law abiding citizens? That notion is completely contrary to common sense.

      • Becky Kress

        Ronald Reagan believed in peace through strength.

        “We know that peace is the condition under which mankind was meant to flourish. Yet peace does not exist of its own will. It depends on us, on our courage to build it and guard it and pass it on to future generations. George Washington’s words may seem hard and cold today, but history has proven him right again and again. “To be prepared for war,” he said, “is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.” Well, to those who think strength provokes conflict, Will Rogers had his own answer. He said of the world heavyweight champion of his day: “I’ve never seen anyone insult Jack Dempsey.” Ronald Reagan, 1983

        • According to today’s conservatives Ronald Reagan would be considered a tyrant since he was a proponent of gun control.

      • fideux

        I don’t know if you have noticed Becky, but virtually everything Obama and our current congressmen and or legislators are doing flys in the face of common sense.

        • Becky Kress

          I have and I agree. My response was not to your comment but, rather, to the comment made by John Phillips, who appears to be advocating for more gun control laws. My hope is that I misunderstand him.

          • fideux

            Me too, Becky, I knew where you were coming from. You and I are on the same page. With John’s avitar, the footprint of an American chicken, I think I know where he’s coming from as well. Those types will get everything that’s coming to them!

    • fideux

      So did the Jews as they were led to concentration camps and the ovens. Obviously, you haven’t read the proposals by Dyin’ Fienstien where she wants to make any gun that has a hand grip illegal. What does that leave you with for protection, a pea shooter?

    • The Supreme Court’s job is to insure that the laws passed by the legislature, as defined by the Constitution not the Supreme Court, are NOT in violation of the Constitution. It is Not the Court’s job to define the Constition, although they have been illegally doing so for a long time. The Executive branch may propose legislation it would like the Legislature to pass but it can NOT make ANY laws on its own, which the Current executive is very fond of doing. The executive branch also has the power to veto any law coming out of the legislature, who can then over ride that veto by a 2/3rd vote. Any law passed by the Congress can become law without the signiture of the President., but even then it can be challenged and sent to the court to see if it does or doe not violate the Constitution. The Constitution is NOT open to being defined or re-defined by anyone Judical, Executive, or Legislature. It can be changed by the Amendment process established within the Constitution but that is the ONLY way the Constitution can be changed. And as far as the 2nd Amendment goes that is probably the plainest and most straight forward of any law ever written: “The right of the People to keep and baer arms shall NOT be infringed.” Any rule, law, order regulation, registration, etc. are and is by its very nature an infringement and thus ILLEGAL. And it doesn’t matter who or what passed or wrote them they are ALL illegal no matter for what reason.
      So until there is an amendment to the Constitution that allows such they are and will remain illegal.

      • So…who has the final say as to whether a law is constitutional or not? The Supreme Court of course. That is “defining” whether a law is constitutional or not. No sheriff has the right to do this. No congressman has the right to do this. The President doesn’t have this power. ONLY the federal judiciary has the legitimate right to determine whether a law is constitutional or not.

        • Defining the LAW in question is NOT Defining the Constitution. None of the three branches of Government have the right or power to do that. The only way to change the Constitution is with the Amendment Process which invovles EVERYBODY before it can be done.
          Yes the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of a law. If it VIOLATES the Constitution it is overturned and can not be put into effect. It is not a comparison of does the Constitution fit in with the law but a check to see if the law fits within the constitution and doesn’t violate any part of the Constitution.
          As for the 2nd Amendment I believe it is extremely plain and clear particularly the last part, “The RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR ARMS shall NOT be INFRINGED. There are no ifs, ands, or buts or any other type of qualifier as much as the Liberals would like everyone to think there is or should be; they are not there.
          If the Liberals are so sure that they are the vast majority and they believe that so much then they need to use the Amendment Process and put those qualifiers in. They won’t do that though because they know it would never pass, and would forever prove them wrong.

          • Lloyd

            Peter, I think you are dead on exept for missing one clarification. the words “shall not be infringed”, not may not be infringed. The word “shall” is quite definitive, leaving no room for exception. If the word may had been used then it could have been called vague. But good job.

          • This phrase “The RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR ARMS shall NOT be INFRINGED.” as you write it is not in the 2nd amendment. You left out the comma and that completely skews the original meaning. Here is the 2nd amendment.

            “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
            right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

            This amendment was written as one sentence and should be taken as a whole. We have 4 phases here separated by commas. This sentence structure (with the commas) and the ambiguous use of the word “the people” (individuals or a collective?) are what make this amendment vague and difficult to precisely interpret. Some people interpret this amendment one way while some interpret it completely differently. By the Constitution,it is the job of the Supreme Court to definitively interpret this amendment in regards to laws that are passed. And the Supreme Court has already found that government can place limits on gun ownership. Neither President Obama nor anyone else has proposed to take away our right to have a gun for protection. And personally, I don’t think a ban on assault style weapons is going to go anywhere in Congress. So much for the so-called tyranny.

          • If you don’t know who or what the People are you must have skipped every science and history class in any school that you went to. I do not see anything that is vague about the 2nd Amendment, particularly about the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Only a liberal who is living in a fantasy world would think it was vague. There are no quilifiers to this right no limits it flat states “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” No wiggle room there.

          • Becky Kress

            Not to mention the fact that the founders also intentionally named us a Republic and spoke of individual rights, not the good of the collective. Seriously, at least make an attempt to read a little instead of trying to sell yourself as a constitutional expert.

          • The phrase “We The People” IS referring to the American people as a collective. The term “the people” as used in the 2A is not so clear.

          • IMO the phrase”shall not be infringed” is referring to the topic phrase “A well regulated Militia”. Personally I think the 2A is mostly referring to the right of states to have an armed militia. The fact that we (and others) are having this debate points out the fact that this amendment is not so “simple and clear” as you suppose.

      • Let’s take the 2nd amendment for example. The 2A is badly written and vague to say the least. Democrats see it one way while Republicans interpret it another way. This amendment BEGS to be defined by the Supreme Court. And this is the job of the Supreme Court. Personally, as I read the 2A, I don’t see that the 2A is about individual rights at all but more about the state’s right to have an armed militia. But the SC has defined that the 2A is partly about the individual’s right to bear arms despite what Democrats may think. AND the SC has determined that government has the right to pass laws to limit gun ownership despite what conservatives may think. BY THE CONSTITUTION this right to “define” the Constitution is given to the Supreme Court.

        • Becky Kress

          Have you ever bothered to read the original writings of any of the founders, or any part of our history? While you might find the language of the second amendment vague, the founding fathers, the authors of the constitution, did expand on it extensively, as did many of their contemporaries. Try reading the Federalist Papers for starters.

          “…but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights…” (Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29.)

          • The opinions of individual founding fathers may cast light upon this vague amendment but they carry little weight as law. The bottom line is that NOBODY is proposing to take away our right to have a gun for protection.

        • Becky Kress

          “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” (Tench Coxe in ‘Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’ under the Pseudonym ‘A Pennsylvanian’ in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)

        • Becky Kress

          “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people” (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)

          “The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.” [William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829)

          “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975)..)

          “And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms….The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants” (Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)

  • As you can see I do not hide behind a user name or anything else. what you see is me and it will be what is there. I swore an Oath the defend the Constitution I do not believe that I have been released from that Oath as only God can do that or I can brake my Oath and that I will not do. ANY law or order, etc. that violates any part of the Constitution is illegal and not only will not be obeyed I feel I am required by my Oath to disobey it. I took this Oath when I first Enlisted in the Army and again when I was Commissioned an Officer in the Army; that was all many years ago, but I still hold that Oath as binding upon me today as the day I first took it.
    I would call upon all my fellow veterans both active and not so active to re-examin their own positions in reguards to this Oath that they have also taken. Soon it may become necessary for all of you to take a stand concerning that Oath. What do you support the Constitution or a would be demigog in the White House who very well may have no legal right to be there in the first place and thus his very presence is a violation of the Constitution.
    Each of you will have to make your own mind up as to how you will stand concerning your Oath. May God grant you the light to see the see the Right, and the wisdom to follow that path, and the Strength to uphold your choice.

  • Lloyd

    Amen to Peter W.W. and thank you.
    A sheriff is an elected official, only the citizens or a court of law deliberating on a crime can remove that sheriff from office.This has been said by others, now I’m saying it too. Delaware sheriffs, hold the line. The federal government are not your bosses.Don’t know how long, but I believe that help will soon be on the way. A lot of people support you. They are the ones who elected you to protect them. Sometimes the protectors need protection from those they protect. I think you know what I mean.
    God Bless.

    • Mr.Mike

      And here in Ohio they have replace the sherrif of Cyahouga County (Cleveland) with a Congressionaly appointyed sherrif. That way he will follow congressional orders instead of the will of the people.

      • Pamm

        If the citizens of Cyahouga County did not vote for the change in electing your sheriff the appointment process could and should be challenged. A government, regardless of the size or scope, cannot take away the people’s right to choose those who hold an office. And sheriff is an office, unlike the Chief of Police, who is an employee of the police department.

  • James Maxwell

    God bless all those who stand against the wannabe tyrants who would destroy our nation.
    Men and Women will stand shoulder to shoulder and fight until our last breath before we
    surrender to such corruption. Politians and those who would sell out our nation for their
    30 pieces of silver had better beware of thier actions and remember the people who
    put you in office can just as easily remove you from office.

  • Mutley

    We, the United States of America, are approaching a point in our history (again) when each citizen must decide whether they will stand up and become men or lie down and become sheep. Do we become sheep and follow the flock or do we become shepherds and led the flock? Obama, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, and Holder are trying to destroy this country from within and we cannot let that happen. I know from talking to my nephew, who is in the Army, that most military do not like Obama and will stand down against their fellow Americans and stand up to tyranny. I have been reading that many sheriffs, Attorney Generals, and Governors will stand up to tyranny also. We cannot let these despots destroy this wonderful country. I served for over 15 years protecting our freedom and I will continue to do so at the cost of my life. I implore all Americans to raise your voices loud and strong and let Barack Adolf Hitler Obama know that he is overstepping his bounds and must cease or face a war with the people, a war he cannot and will not win.

    • President Obama has an above 60% approval rating even in these polarized political times. I am proud of my President. He is a good man and will be known as a great President. You extremist cons are in the minority.

      • Becky Kress

        The fact that you believe in President Obama and his agenda brings your sanity into question for me. His destructive agenda is clear to anyone who cares to look into it. You are free to comment as you see fit but your comments cannot be taken seriously anymore. It’s a bit ironic, isn’t it, that your avatar is a peace symbol and the president you revere has incited more hatred and division in this nation than any president before him ever could? Love him if you will. There are many sheeple in this nation. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. But you will never convince patriots to join you.

  • RedMeatState

    The 2nd Amendment is written in stone. Make Congress obey the law!!

    No one has considered this:

    there are Federal Laws in place that block Gun Control legislation. One is the
    Dick Act (1902) that identifies the general population

    as the militia and guarantees their

    So why doesn’t Congress (House and
    Senate) obey the law???????? Why do they think they can violate the law

    But they go right to work to
    dismantle it, don’t they? They need to be ejected from office!!

    This act invalidates all Federal Gun “control”
    laws. from 1902! There is no excuse now!!!

    The Dick Act
    of 1902

    The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia
    Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It
    also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

    three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth
    known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia,
    the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every
    able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized
    militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and
    bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

    The Dick
    Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex
    post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S.
    Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero
    authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve
    outside of their State borders.

    The National Guard Militia can only be
    required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the
    Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and
    repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government
    can call upon the National Guard.

    Attorney General Wickersham advised
    President Taft, “the Organized Militia (the National Guard) can not be employed
    for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.”

    Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917,
    proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia
    (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional
    that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

    During the war with
    England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president
    to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory,
    Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise
    point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to
    empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of
    the country.

    The fact is that the President has no constitutional right,
    under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the
    borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states.
    Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the
    legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to

    Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a
    speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House,
    September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: “The militia, within the
    meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the
    United States.” In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster,
    “that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the
    militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus
    being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded
    with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and
    limits the power of Congress over it.”

    “This limitation upon the power to
    raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the
    framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing
    army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and
    conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile
    thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be
    paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the
    extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the
    country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia
    imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or
    limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such

    The Honorable William Gordon
    Congressional Record, House, Page
    640 – 1917

  • wabobs

    New deal don’t forget, as of 1948. We are now in the Generation of the Fig Tree. God has spoken, mostly in Ezekiel and the Book of Revelations. It is proven that God means what He says.
    Things are moving right along, just as He has foretold us! Don’t sweat it too much!

    • OK? I always told my students there are no dumb questions except the one you don’t ask. So to live up to what I told them I have to ask you, what do you mean the Generation of the Fig Tree? I do not recall ever having heard that before. So could you please explain it to me? Thank you really I am serious not trying to be sarcastic.

  • marineh2ominer

    Ronald Reagan hasn’t been wrong yet , why would this be an exception ? I won’t surrender but I haven’t much time left , I and thousands like me , loyal patriots , will soon be gone to the ravages of time . I don’t feel good about the ones the communists have already dumbed down and brainwashed or indoctrinated .

  • Foghat

    I , for one, shall die on my feet rather than serve on my knees !!!