creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Oliver North
Oliver North
10 Feb 2012
Freedom From Religion

WASHINGTON — "We don't need you, so shut up!" That's the message the Obama administration has … Read More.

3 Feb 2012
Blacklist

Co-written by Tom Kilgannon blacklist (n.): a list of persons who are disapproved of or are to be punished or boycotted. … Read More.

27 Jan 2012
SOTU Surrender

WASHINGTON — It's an unwritten law of modern America that a political campaign speech should last no … Read More.

Freedom Matters

Share Comment

PIERRE, S.D. — My son and I are on ground where one of my heroes — the legendary Joe Foss, U.S. Marine, America's leading ace in aerial combat, Medal of Honor recipient, mentor and friend — once stood beside me. We're hunting — exercising our Second Amendment right "to keep and bear Arms." We will be back home in time to vote in hopes that this right of the people won't be infringed. But I wonder.

Last week in Ohio, the Obama campaign suggested that Americans need a "second Bill of Rights." The idea — not a new one for liberals — came this time from Rep. Marcy Kaptur as she introduced Sen. Obama at a rally in Toledo. Kaptur enthusiastically endorsed the initiative, first proffered by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt Jan. 11, 1944. Obama said nothing to disabuse his enthusiastic followers of the notion. But it was a bad idea when FDR advocated it, and it is now.

President Roosevelt made the proposal in his State of the Union address — delivered over the radio from the White House instead of in person before Congress. He claimed that he had the flu and that his doctors would not permit him "to go up to the Capitol." The nation was then — as we are today — at war. And FDR, the "indispensable leader," already was preparing for his fourth presidential campaign.

In promoting his new "Bill of Rights," Roosevelt observed that we already enjoyed "certain inalienable political rights — among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures." He then said, "They were our rights to life and liberty." Notably, FDR used the past tense and omitted the Second Amendment in its entirety — no small lapse when nearly 16 million Americans were under arms.

Unfortunately, the idea that our original Bill of Rights is inadequate — or even archaic — has achieved new currency with liberals. In enumerating his abbreviated version of the first 10 amendments to our Constitution, FDR described our rights as "political" and insufficient. The Framers saw them as God-given and a sacred trust to deliver unabridged to future generations.

Therein is the challenge in next week's elections. The mainstream media and the polls predict a rout to the left.

Does that mean Congress would have free rein to resurrect FDR's "second Bill of Rights"? And if so, what then happens to the real Bill of Rights, first handed into our care Dec. 15, 1791?

The practitioners of politics — and those who write and speak about it — claim that these matters are secondary to "pocketbook issues." I was told this week, "Nobody in America cares about that 'constitutional stuff' right now with all that's gone wrong with our economy." If that's true, we're in more serious trouble than my 401(k).

Perhaps I have spent too much of my life with young Americans who sacrificed the comforts of home and the company of loved ones to take on the responsibility of protecting the rest of us. They didn't sign up to fight for gold or colonial conquest or "the economy." The soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardsmen and Marines I have been covering for Fox News Channel in Mesopotamia, Afghanistan, the Persian Gulf and the Philippine archipelago volunteered to defend us and protect our liberty from those who had done us grievous harm.

They raised their right hands and took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States." They understand what it means to "bear true faith and allegiance." Most of them have seen parts of the world where there is no freedom, and they know that freedom is an idea worth fighting for, preferably at a great distance from home.

Thanks to the courage and sacrifice of young Americans in uniform and those who preceded them, foreign adversaries do not immediately threaten our liberty. But freedom certainly is at risk here at home if our elected leaders and appointed judges believe that our essential freedoms are "political rights." If that is true, then politicians and the judges they appoint can abridge, alter or eliminate them.

The extraordinary dedication, commitment and tenacity of American men and women in uniform serving the cause of freedom inspire me. Their bravery and perseverance on battlefields around the world should remind us all that freedom is fragile and must be defended to flourish. The Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, did not come to us gratis or without obligation.

We are blessed in America that we can fend for freedom with ballots instead of bullets. Our charge is to elect those who will deliver those freedoms intact and undiminished to those who follow us, as my son and I now follow in the footsteps of Joe Foss.

Oliver North is the host of "War Stories" on Fox News Channel, the founder and honorary chairman of Freedom Alliance, and the author of "American Heroes." To find out more about Oliver North and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.


Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment
Sir; ... We have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness... If you believe in the right to property you can kiss the rest of your rights goodbye... People are welcome to property; but if they think it is free and clear, then no right enjoyed now by those without property is worth anything, because to keep what they have taken the rich, just like a thief, will turn their guns on the people... Do you believe religion has rights, or the press??? If so, let them earn their rights... You know we pay for our rights with taxes and defense of country; if you won't do either you haven't got one right I will support... I don't support the denomination's right to use their freedom to attack all freedom... I don't support any right for corporate news papers and media to attack all our rights... They have a privilage granted so long as they serve a public purpose... And I too support the right to bear arms, but there is no denying that the threat of violence is against working people... If it ever comes to the use of arms for self defense, or defense of rights against government or big business; we would lose, hands down... It is essential to recognize that if the present form is not working then violence will be worse than useless, even if the Declaration of Independence makes revolution our right... Rather, we do not need violence, nor a justification of violence, but only need to withdraw our faith in the government, and we would see then that it is only a form depending upon us, and our trust, for its being... That is the problem, is it not: That we can no longer trust our government, nor our fellow Americans??? I don't trust you for sure... I hope you do not trust me without cause... But once we recognize the need for trust in every form of relationship from family to government; then we know what goal to move toward, -trust; but trust that is well justified, as it is not today.. Trust is essential to every form, and when our trust is abused it is usually gone for good.. If you want the relationship called the United States of America you are going to have to figure out how to fill it with trust.. Without that trust we should just fall out, and go our separate ways.. . And something else... I do not support the rights of parties to interfere in the process of government... There is a great deal of inertia built into our government; but parties add inertia onto inertia so government can barely work in any sense of the word...The right of free association is an individual right not supporting collusion, cabals, and conspiracies... The people need free communication with their government...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:35 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Oliver North
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Judge Napolitano
Judge Andrew P. NapolitanoUpdated 16 Feb 2012
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 15 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 15 Feb 2012

5 Sep 2008 Report From a Forgotten War (5th and Last in a Series)

8 Jan 2010 Shocked

30 Nov 2007 Peace Process?