Happy Fourth of July!

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred. to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Comments

[Chris Prevatt]

Two Hundred Thirty years ago, a few subjects of King George pledged their very lives and fortunes on to the principle of freedom from tyranny.

Today we find ourselves, in a very similar place. Our President, who sees himself as a King and ironically named George, has threatened those same liberties which we celebrate today.

May we once again live in freedom from the despotism of tyrant named George, and God Bless the United States of America.

[Jubal]

Good grief, Chris -- if you must post a paranoid left-wing rants like that, I think Daily Kos or some other garden spot of the Left fever swamp would be more appropriate.

Calling George Bush a despot just shows you wouldn't know despotism if it hit you in the face.

[Iscosoles Kramer]

You should read up on wikipedia of what despotism actually means Chris, simply embarrassing

[MrWhipple]

Hmmmm ... so does OCR editorial board member John Seiler qualify as a "paranoid left-wing[er]"?

http://blogs.ocregister.com/orangepunch/archives/2006/07/happy_independence_day.html

Although I fully admit it's hyperbolic to refer to George W. Bush as "King George," the vast expansion of executive powers under the current administration is a step (or even two or three) toward despotism and away from a Constitutional system of limited powers and checks and balances.

Bravo to the Supreme Court for striking down Bush's kangaroo courts. Long live the rule of law.

[Chris Prevatt]

From Dictionary.com

despot (n): A ruler with absolute power.

"Left-wing rant?" I don't think so?

Considering George Bush ordering the warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens, and claiming the power to ignore laws passed by Congress at will; how much closer to "ruler with absolute power" do we need to get before we can call these actions despotism?

[Jubal]

MrWhipple:

You are perfectly aware that John Seiler is obviously not a paranoid left-winger, John belongs to that segment of conservatives who strenuously object to the expansion of federal law enforcement powers as part of the war on terrorism. A least conservatives like John are consistent in their opposition to expansive federal powers, unlike the loony Kos Left that howls when the federal power is expanded to fight a war against an eenmy determined to destory us, but happily urges the expansion of federal power in the service of re-shaping domestic society to their liking.

Chris:

I would think a despot would be unafraid to defy Congress by once in a while vetoing an act of Congress. The general Left-wing ranting that Bush is a despot reminds me of Clinton-haters who used to assert that Bill Clinton had critics and people-who-knew-to-much rubbed out in order to silnce them. Both strains are ludicrous.

Bush is not a despot. That is manifestly obvious. The call him such is to adopt a Humpty Dumpty approach to political language:

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

[MrWhipple]

Jubal:

Of course I'm aware of Seiler's views. I brought them out here to demonstrate that Chris doesn't have to be a "paranoid left-winger" to be concerned about overreaching executive power. Your first comment was a knee-jerk "you're a leftist!" response that is not necessarily the case.

As far as Bush's veto record, why would he veto acts of Congress when Congress is controlled by his own political party, and nothing gets out of Congress without Republican approval, as steered by Congressional leaders that love and support Bush?

Is Bush literally a "despot"? Of course not. But he has gone further in eroding civil and privacy rights than any President in recent history. Combine this with complete Republican control of Congress, and Bush is closer to despotism than most of his predecessors.

If the Democrats ever take control of all three branches of the federal government, I suspect they'll go just as far. Power corrupts.

[Jubal]

MrWhipple, I understand where you are coming from.

I'm all for a vigorous discussion of the proper balance between a wartime expansion of federal powers versus protection of our civil liberties.

But left-wing rants that simply call Bush a despot and compare him to King George III are ludicrous on their face and contibute zilch to any worthy debate.

You do not think Bush is a literally a despot -- because he is not a despot, or even close to being one.

However, Chris Prevatt clearly does believe Bush to be a despot -- and I think that precludes Chris from serious discussion on the subject (unless he simply doesn't understand the meaning of the word).

[DanC]

"Loony Kos Left?" Either you guys don't read the site very closely or you don't get what Kos is all about. I'd hold up Kos as a mirror image to say a Michelle Malkin or Hugh Hewitt (for your OC angle). News and analysis from a leftward perspective. Just like Hewitt gives it from the right.