The One True Patriot Syndrome

I have to mention something that probably won’t make me very popular here on my own site – but it is what it is.

I got after Joe over the past few weeks, not because I disagree or dislike him, but because I watch him produce outstanding and powerful logic and post very well-reasoned positions…and then, at least for me, they get destroyed by things like the “Obama can never be a natural born citizen!” argument. While things like this may well be the letter of the law, they certainly haven’t been expressed in the spirit of the law since the Constitution was ratified in 1789 and now they are a quixotic distraction.

He’s not the only one who does it. It is what I have termed the “One True Patriot” syndrome. I’ve had it – still do – it is just a mild form of megalomania while waving Old Glory – and it allows our opponents to dismiss the larger, more important parts of our positions by generalizing them to claim that the sum total are “fringe” or “extreme”.

I feel the same way about “outrage” over Obama’s vacations, his golf outings, Bo’s travel arrangements, Michelle’s $500 sneakers and the lavish parties. Of course, I post them – duh – they get hits but I’m sorry; I think that too much time is wasted on these things when these are but symptoms of the larger issue.

Greg Gutfeld of Fox’s The Five and Red Eye did it on The Five and again when he hosted O’Reilly’s show a few days ago:

Greg Gutfeld, guest-hosting for Bill O’Reilly, found it a waste of time for conservatives to complain about President Obama golfing and going on vacation, as it distracts from issues and real scandals conservatives should actually be outraged about. Erick Erickson suggested Obama’s leisure activities plays into the overall idea of a Washington that’s “out of touch,” but agreed with Gutfeld that conservatives being “shrill” about these things is what tunes out the rest of the country from more legitimate issues.

Gutfeld allowed it’s okay to talk about these things once in a while, but when news outlets like Fox keep relying on the same footage of Obama golfing to bash him, it keeps them from talking about serious, albeit “more boring” stories. Erickson added it even makes conservatives out to be “angry and bitter.”

Gutfeld surmised Obama must love the distractions, while Erickson pointed out that the media uses this as an excuse to ignore Obama bashing in general. Gutfeld closed by reminding viewers that despite constant attacks from the left, George W. Bush won re-election, and Obama did the same in 2012, so conservatives need to pick and choose their battles.

I agree.

I also laughed my ass off back in May when Gutfeld was quoted as calling the media “Obama’s scandal condom”…and he is spot on with that assessment.

But I disagree with Erikson about it displaying that Washington is “out of touch”.

I think Washington is “out of touch” but in the individual case of the Obamas, it is more of an indictment of the character of our President and First Lady than just an “insulated inside the Beltway” phenomenon. What kind of person give speeches about the economy where he states that he “won’t rest until everybody that wants a job has one” and “jobs are my number one priority” and then golfs 133 times in 4 years? What kind of person claims to have reduced government when they have set record levels of public debt? What kind of person goes on a series of expensive vacations, paid for by the taxpayers, when there are record numbers of people on food stamps and disability and workforce participation is at a 30 year low?

What kind of people will defend him by claiming that “other presidents have done it”?

It is the kind of people who are not willing to look at events in context and assess the character of a man, simply because he has value to them because he advances their beliefs.

That’s a little like saying that Hitler was a good leader because he made the government efficient and made the trains run on time…while ignoring that he exterminated 6 million Jews and threw Europe into ruin…

It’s certainly not like both sides of the political spectrum don’t have examples – but from experience, my opinion is that this is far more prevalent on the left than on the right.

For example, to make a similar claim about Obama, one would have to exhibit what Ace at AOSHQ calls Strategic Ignorance in this post about Our Own Texas Abortion Darling, Wendy Davis:

Wendy Davis told John McCormack that she didn’t know what happened in the Gosnell case, using the ploy of Strategic Ignorance to avoid his next question (What do you think we should do to avoid future Gosnells?).

She claimed she had no idea of what happened in Gosnell’s clinic, despite launching a filiibuster against a law directly inspired by Gosnell, then added all she did know about Gosnell was that he operated a regulated ambulatory surgical center.

Which is a strange thing to have as the One Thing you know about Gosnell. It would be as if a friend just said something about John Wayne Gacy’s clown paintings, then you say, “Yeah, I guess we can see the hints that he was a serial killer of young runaway boys,” and then he goes, “Whazthatnow? Serial killer? You mean John Wayne Gacy, celebrated painter of clowns, killed someone? You’re saying that the Thomas Kincaid of red floppy shoes is some kind of serial killerWow. Mind. Blown. Whoa. I totally did not see that one coming.”

… As a member of the thuggish left she is more or less required to lie with every utterance.

The left calls this “having a fighting spirit.”

How can liberals cry “racism” when a clerk questions a sloppily dressed, no makeup Oprah Winfrey when the act she calls “racist” is the attempted purchase of a $38,000 purse? Didn’t see that reported, did you? That kind of ruins the whole racism angle, doesn’t it? Could the clerk not have been discriminating against people of lesser means? All The Oprah had to do was to whip out her black American Express and the discrimination would have ended.

Maybe this is another example of Strategic Ignorance.

This isn’t about what prior presidents have or have not done. It is about the character of a man, the current office holder, who looks at the state of our Union, assesses the propriety of such a thing and yet chooses to do something that most Americans would not.

If your neighbor’s house just burned to the ground, would you hold a pool party the next day? If your friend’s child just died, would you invite them to your child’s birthday party?

That is what ties this to Benghazi, the IRS, the NSA, Fast and Furious and the New Black Panther voter intimidation case. In all of these, there was a choice to be made and Obama’s weakness of character succumbed to political goals.

How can a liberal crow about the vacations of the 1% when Obama is enjoying a 1% vacation – except on the public credit card?

If the left can avoid the discussion of character by pointing a finger at an imprisoned filmmaker, at “low level employees in Cincinnati”, at Edward Snowden, at George W. Bush and at voter ID laws, they can avoid the conclusion that this man is not ethically fit to be President…and maybe avoid introspection of their own true motivations.

That is the discussion that we should be having.

58 thoughts on “The One True Patriot Syndrome

  1. Very well thought-out article. And I hate to appear “quixotic” in my first response…..But then My name is “Don” after all …. ;- ))

    So just THIS aspect of what you wrote I think needs commenting on….you say..

    “…things like the “Obama can never be a natural born citizen!” argument. While things like this may well be the letter of the law, they certainly haven’t been expressed in the spirit of the law since the Constitution was ratified in 1789 and now they are a quixotic distraction….”

    I actually think you are Wrong in 2 respects…..(1) In 1789 and NOW the concern was ( and should Be) influences from Foreign Countries and Individuals……and I think this concern has been an active one in our history….I DON’T think it has been ignored. (2) The softening of Concern over this issue is of Relative RECENT ( past 10 years) making…….probably because of increasing influence FROM Foriegn Countries and their “Friends” in the State Dept and now Congress and some in the Business Community.

    So People ( Patriots included ) are correct to continue being Concerned about (1) and about the seeming abrogation of Duty evidenced by (2 ), of which the recent push for Amnesty for Illegals by Congress and their Business lobbyists is one of many indications.

    Rhetorically you are making a position ( or implying one ) that the original Concern of the Founders was….”of really no concern to begin with….because it’s never been upheld in the *spirit of the law* ” and those who feel it IS are “extreme” or “fringe”……………..which is basically an articulation of the Liberal Left and their “GOP” friends like Jeb Bush, Rove, McCain, Rubio and all the usual culprits. Within this position are implied the “Living Constitution” concept and the “Wing-nut” and Wacko-Bird rhetoric used to demonize the Right.

    • From the post; “While things like this may well be the letter of the law, they certainly haven’t been expressed in the spirit of the law since the Constitution was ratified in 1789 and now they are a quixotic distraction.”

      Really? How can one discern or know the spirit of the law if one cannot know the letter of the law? If black is red, and red is white, and white is black: unless of course; the particular individual we are talking about is a member of a favored “group”…. Then white might be red, or white, or blue, or black; depending on whose “ox is going to get gored and whose pigs are going to get fat…”

      The link above is researched and sound legal reasoning. Sorry Utah, but political leaders after the “civil war” understood the term “natural born citizen” and discussed at length that the 13th & 14th amendments affected ONLY the definition of “citizen”. Not the definition of “natural born citizen”.
      I explained further here;

      As former whitehouse attorney and current constitutional attorney, Mark Levin, explains: America is currently living under a federal govt. that is operating in a “post-Constitutional” era. In others words, the Constitution, THE LAW, the social contract, which gives the federal government lawful legitimacy, is being ignored in any matter the federal govt. wishes.

      From; the simplest of ministerial actions such as presentment and signing of an actual bill by the president;

      To; all revenue bills SHALL originate in the “house of representatives”:

      To straightforward constitutional language;
      “Amendment IV
      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

      Even Justice Scalia claims and exclaims the same thing here with respect to the “interpreters of the law” (the US Supreme Court);

      Everyone! “move along, nothing to see here, or here, or here, or here, or here, or here, or here….etc.”

      • How many political candidates have been eliminated using Joe’s argument? I understand strict constructionism as well as anyone and I wish it were as simple as you make it but if you go and read some of the actual debates between Constitutional scholars you will find that not even originalists agree on all points.

        I’ve learned a lot from The Originalism Blog of the Center for the Study of Constitutional Originalism
        at the University of San Diego School of Law.

    • Actually, I don’t think I did any of that. What I pointed out is that the position taken on the “natural born citizen” simply has not been supported in law…ever. It was tried against Chester A. Arthur, Barry Goldwater. George Romney, Lowell Weicker and most recently, John McCain (in the Republican primaries for Christ’s sake). I never assumed nor asserted that this an aspect of the “Living Constitution”, merely a definition of the term.

      Joe’s reasoning is the same as the Woodrow Wilson campaign’s of Charles Evans Hughes legitimacy, a man Wilson narrowly defeated for president.

      The main point of the post was to indicate that there is a prioritization that needs to take place when we argue a point. In my opinion, the “natural born” point is like standing outside your house as it burns and stating “the sky is blue” – it may well be true and a fact but not a fact that is relevant to the problem at hand. Not every problem or argument carries the same weight. They all carry different import at different times. Joe’s position on the “natural born” issue is one that is distinctly in the minority and would never rise to the level that would drive removal from office and that is what makes it quixotic.

      • I understand Joe’s position to be in accord with the federalistblog link I provided above.

        Frankly, I didn’t know there were words in our Constitution which fulfilled the definition of “quixotic”:

        I had to look up the definition at
        “Definition of QUIXOTIC

        1 : foolishly impractical especially in the pursuit of ideals; especially : marked by rash lofty romantic ideas or extravagantly chivalrous action
        2 : capricious, unpredictable

        When future men and women decide whichever part they do not like, is quixotic, and does not apply to them or their friends, in short order, not a single word in the Constitution applies to anyone with the SAME, or EQUAL amount. And then, “all men are created equal”, becomes, friends and foes, although both citizens, will be treated differently, taxed differently, given money taken from others or have money taken to be given to others, without due process under the law.

        And then my friend, we have anarchy. As “the law” only has as much meaning, and authority, and honor, and respect, as each individual, or “magistrate”, wishes to at that moment, to give or take from “the law”.

        The loss of liberty. Either all have liberty, or none have liberty and we have TYRANNY OF THE MOST POWERFUL AND THE STRONGEST… simply, anarchy.

        Truly, then, only G-d can help “us”.

  2. Bill Clinton spent the least amount of time on vacation, 28 days, of any President. Why not? He was getting BJ’s in the Oval Office! Bush spent 1020 days on vacation, the most of any President. This during a war, and a recession that hurt many American families. Eisenhower took the longest vacation, 4 MONTHS!!! Repubs take the gold!
    I’m not excusing Obama, not at all. He has more examples of bad behavior not to follow than any other President, and he still does the same things, ofttimes more than his predecessors and to a greater degree. I know that they are all working vacations, but image is all to many.
    I could not agree more about the distraction issue. In fact, I think Obama kept the ‘mystery’ of his birthplace alive, 1) to make the right look silly, and 2 ) The word of the day, distraction! Pay no attention to the extension of the Patriot Act, our kow-towing to China, just tell us.'”Where’s his long-form birth certificate. Anyway?” (I confess, I don’t have mine, either. I never even knew that there was such a thing as a long form birth certificate before the birther movement started).
    Good post.

  3. Utah,

    OK, again, NOT looking to fight. I just want clarification.

    If we are not to talk about the fact that Obama doesn’t meet the legal requirement of a natural born citizen (he doesn’t) and that Benghazi represents the Constitutional definition of treason (it does), and we are not to do this because it “causes political harm to our side,” then what will stop the other side from painting everything that harms them in this same light?

    In other words, if we DO silence ourselves because of how we think others will see it, then Alinsky has already won and they will continue to use the same tactic of isolating and ridiculing anything that we bring against him. They are already doing this with his trips (the Right wants to deny our hard working President a little relaxation, yada-yada-yada).

    So, can you explain to me how you are not arguing for surrender under a different name?

    Again, NO attack — serious, sincere question. 🙂

    • Not viewed as an attack but I’ve read the history of how this has been used against candidates going back to before Chester A. Arthur (who was supposedly born in Canada) and while I see how you got there, I just don’t see that history vindicates your position.

      • Utah,

        I understand. I also understand that “real politic” will get us exactly where the Progressives want to take us. I suppose — as another RNL reader once pointed out — I have a lot in common with Patrick Henry in this regard.

        I also have to ask whether or not the facts in all previous cases were as clear cut as this one? I do not rest my argument on WHERE Obama was born, but on the fact that Obama has dual citizenship through his father. I’m just “trying” to follow the law as it was written and intended to function.

        • I understand that is your opinion – but the fact remains that it has never been tested in any court of law. To quote another legal website:

          No Supreme Court opinion has “defined” natural born citizenship for purposes of presidential eligibility. The cases cited were either dictum or concerned ordinary citizenship sufficient to vote or hold office other than that of president.

          Although one could seek a declaratory judgment from a court, there is no point at which one can get injunctive relief. The only point at which eligibility can be effectively challenged is at the point Congress counts the electoral votes, and no court has jurisdiction to tell Congress how to do that. At that point it is up to the members of Congress to voluntarily comply with the Constitution. It does not work to try to exclude an ineligible candidate from the ballot because people are not voting for the candidate, they are voting for electors, and it is only the eligibility of the electors that matters at that point.

      • Utah,
        I followed the legal research of another attorney who claims to have gone to the “brick and mortar” libraries of the actual law libraries and law schools in the east and northeast. I “spot checked” some of sources, and they were cited correctly…
        From that attorney’s legal research, Arthur was indeed born in Canada, and kept it hidden from the electorate, meanwhile, the “Chief Justice” Arthur appointed, is the very same Judge who decided to allow Arthur to remain President…

        However, place of birth, is not “the” determining factor for “natural born citizen”.

        “Place of birth” is nonsensical argument to take everyone’s eye off of the ball”… For instance, assume George Washington, after winning the Revolutionary War, had been sent to Europe, or some other foreign jurisdiction, as an Ambassador, after the adoption of the Constitution. During Revolutionary War era, entire families traveled with foreign dignitaries. Assume George Washington had traveled with his family and Martha had given birth to a son while in England. Do you really believe, a hypothetical Washington Jr., born in England, while his father was in the service of the United States of America, would NOT be a “natural born citizen”?

        Now assume, General Gage, in 1795, comes to America as a diplomat with his family and his wife has a son while in New York or Philadelphia. Would anyone really assume, that General Gage’s son, would be a “natural born citizen”? Of course not.

        Arthur was not a “natural born citizen” if indeed Arthur’s father was not an American citizen at the time of Arthur’s birth. Arthur’s appointee made the decision to allow the man that gave him a “lifetime job” to remain in office so that the “decision maker” could keep his lifetime job…

        “FACTS”: Obama’s self pro-claimed late father, was an English subject, a temporary sojourner in America, an avowed Communist/Marxist and Muslim, who returned to the English Colony: the East Africa Protectorate (as Kenya was not created until several years after Obama was born) after having impregnating Obama’s mother. No matter where Obama was born, Obama is an English citizen. Obama is also an American citizen as his Mother was an American citizen. Obama had dual citizenship at the time of his birth.

        A “natural born citizen” can only have allegiance to one country. The U.S.A. Singular citizenship means no allegiances or duties to any other crown or country. WHY? So they cannot be drafted into another Crown’s army. Why? So that the commander in chief of America’s armed forces will never owe allegiance to another crown or country. A “natural born citizen” can NEVER have dual citizenship. In other words, if a child has dual citizenship at the time of birth, then they have dual citizenship, duties, allegiances, and loyalties, by internationally recognized law, and therefore can never be a “natural born citizen”.

        “Natural born citizen” is as simple as this.
        Is “the Constitution” quixotic?
        Is “the Constitution” not worth the paper it is written on?

        If the answer to the last 2 questions is Yes or True, then G-d help all humankind.

        • I’ll ask again – what case law or example is there that this definition has ever been used to disqualify a candidate for national office?

          Once again, you speak as if the Constitution was a document that was perfectly understood as if it were handed down at Mount Sinai. You guys are treating it as if it is the Koran, the Founders were Muhammad and we are devout Muslims. I am NOT supportive of a “living constitution”, nor am I supportive of the twisting of the words in it to get what is politically desired but to assume that there is only one interpretation and that the Founders were completely in unison is naive. I never got an answer about the differences that the Founders like Jefferson and Paine believed and why only what you agree with is considered relevant and those positions weren’t. My point was not to say that liberties should be taken with the document, only that there were significant differences in what the very men who crafted it thought it meant.

          Just because you are born here doesn’t assure allegiance. The purpose of that statement in the Constitution was to eliminate the possibility of a member of foreign royalty from gaining control of our government and then pledging his allegiance to his family in his home country.

          • “Just because you are born here doesn’t assure allegiance. The purpose of that statement in the Constitution was to eliminate the possibility of a member of foreign royalty from gaining control of our government and then pledging his allegiance to his family in his home country.”


            “I’ll ask again – what case law or example is there that this definition has ever been used to disqualify a candidate for national office?”

            Good point. Does the Constitution matter? Does it? Does only part of the Constitution matter? If so, then which part?

            You tell me. Either the Constitution matters, or it does not matter. Either all of the words matter, or none of them. The Constitution is very short.

            Don’t like the Constitution? Quixotic? REPEAL it. All of it. Stop pretending. Stop lying to yourself and to us all.

            Honorable and honest men most generally, did not support candidates who did not meet the definition and most never reached the office. When men decided to ignore our Constitution, here, and there, and over yonder, it only took another century for all men to say: Well, “we” never “actually meant that”….

            IF the Constitution is no longer worth the paper it is written on, then call AMERICAN’S bluff. Admit it.

            “LET’S ROLL”

            We will see if liberty still lives in the hearts of honorable persons. Or is mankind is deaf, dumb, blind, and greedy?

  4. As an aside: I am not assuming this post is about me; I just want to make it clear that — where I am concerned — I NEVER claimed to be “The One True Patriot.” I just stated a FACT — because it is a fact — and asserted that, if we refuse to stand on fact because we determine it not to be ‘politically expedient,’ then we have already surrendered our founders ideals and principles. IMHO, from that point forward, we are just arguing over what flavor of Kool-Aid we wish to mix with our Statism.

    • Now this may come off as simplistic, and maybe that’s just what is needed, but …

      I think the notion is that we lost our freedoms in increments, and we’ll have to regain it in increments …. picking and choosing our battles along the way, and avoiding distractions.

      I could be wrong, but I think that is the crux of Utah’s post.

      • Be careful. It is dangerous to agree with me…but you are exactly right. All these SyFy “Sharknado” level posts don’t feed the bulldog. We only have one defense and that is to elect people who have a big enough set of gonads to stand up and stop this.

        Totalitarianism and tyranny are never implemented by iron law, they are introduced by capricious application of a myriad of laws and that is exactly what the Obamaites are doing.

        • “Totalitarianism and tyranny are never implemented by iron law, they are introduced by capricious application of a myriad of laws and that is exactly what the Obamaites are doing.”

          I can’t argue this statement. In fact, it’s so good that it’s worthy of thievery. 🙂

          In the end, I see us all on the same team.

          • Agreed. Different paths to the same destination.

            And take anything you like, I’ve been reading a lot so I probably stole the idea from somewhere.

        • It’s not danderous to agree with You Utah………You are merely expressing the Majority Republican opinion ( and even some of the Liberal ones).

          Where McCain uses “Wacko Bird”… use “SyFy Sharknado”.

          On another post you lauded Mark Levin’s new Book. ( Which I agree with you on )………..BUT……His book is based on the Premise that “electing people” via the Congress and Senate will NOT work….he has said clearly and Often lately…….the Voting system…the Representative System is BROKEN……and quote ” We aren’t going to fix this through Washington”………………His book is aimed at an entirely different approach. Both Constitutionally and Locally in our communities and States.

          It would appear as if you HAVEN’T been listening to him……in response to a recent caller who said what you said about “Electing the right people”…..he said………”We tried that….it didn’t work ”

          If the Compromised Phony voting system we have is TRUELY our “One Defence”……….then we are headed for a Thousand years of Tyranny and Darkness like Reagan said.

          Or perhaps I didn’t get the memo ……….. is he also a Persona non grata here now too ?

      • Augger,

        I can accept your comment for what it is. In return, I would ask:

        As poignant as Utah’s question about where the case law is to support my assertion that Obama is not a natural born citizen, I would ask you to show me where in history has liberty been won incrementally? 😉

        • Thank You Joe ………….. The Voice of Rationality !

          The other side of this of Course is Tyranny NEVER gives up Incrementally. And is DOES implement by Iron Law !!!

            • What’s that old saying again, sir? Rome wasn’t built in a day?

              I believe we get each other’s point, and I can live with that. 🙂

              • Augger,

                The Colonies declared their independence on a single day. They did not SECURE it for several years.

                Now, if you want to argue that it was not won until secured, you can make that case. I’ll not argue that point. But, as a point of order, our freedom was “won” the moment they signed the Declaration of Independence. “Securing” it afterward just meant they got to keep what they won.


          • Actually Augger I would like that as well.

            Joe asked…”I would ask you to show me where in history has liberty been won incrementally?”

            You then said again….”Actually, our very own freedom did not happen all at once. It progressed incrementally over the years”

            What exactly are you refering to ? The War was from 1775-1783, after debate the final ratification process took from 1786-1790 or 1791 I can’t remember………… But in the States where it was ratified….it was ratified from that date onwards…NOT incrementally.

            • If you need an accurate time line, follow this link while I edit and format that timeline for this forum:


              The path to our liberty took steps, not one sudden gigantic leap. Incremental, and deliberate.

              Timeline of the Revolutionary War

              — The French and Indian War
              — June 19-July 11 The Albany Congress
              — Oct. 7 Proclamation of 1763
              — April 5 The Sugar Act
              — September 1 The Currency Act
              — March 22 The Stamp Act
              — March 24 The Quartering Act of 1765
              — May 29 Patrick Henry’s “If this be treason, make the most of it!” speech
              — May 30 The Virginia Stamp Act Resolutions
              — Oct. 7-25 The Stamp Act Congress
              — March 18 The Declaratory Act
              — June 29 The Townshend Revenue Act
              — August 1 Boston Non-Importation Agreement
              — March 5 The Boston Massacre
              — June 9 The Gaspee Affair
              — May 10 The Tea Act
              — Dec. 16 The Boston Tea Party
              — March 31 Boston Port Act, one of the “Intolerable Acts”
              — May 20 Administration of Justice Act, one of the “Intolerable Acts”
              — May 20 Massachusetts Government Act, one of the “Intolerable Acts”
              — June 2 Quartering Act of 1774, one of the “Intolerable Acts”
              — June 22 Quebec Act, one of the “Intolerable Acts”
              — Sept. 5-Oct. 26 The First Continental Congress meets in Philadelphia and issues Declaration and Resolves
              — Oct. 10 Battle of Point Pleasant, Virginia (disputed as to whether it was a battle of the American Revolution or the culmination of Lord Dunmore’s War)
              — Oct. 20 The Association (prohibition of trade with Great Britain)
              — Oct. 24 Galloway’s Plan rejected
              — March 23 Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty or give me death” speech
              — Apr. 18 The Rides of Paul Revere and William Dawes
              — Apr. 19 Minutemen and redcoats clash at Lexington and Concord “The shot heard ’round the world.”
              — May 10 Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys seize Fort Ticonderoga
              — May 10 The Second Continental Congress meets in Philadelphia
              — June 15 George Washington named Commander in Chief
              — June 17 Battle of Bunker Hill: The British drive the Americans from Breed’s Hill
              — July 3 Washington assumes command of the Continental Army
              — Nov. 10-21 Ninety Six, SC, Patriots sieged
              — Nov. 13 The patriots under Montgomery occupy Montreal in Canada
              — Dec. 11 Virginia and NC patriots rout Loyalist troops and burn Norfolk
              — Dec. 22 Col. Thomson with 1,500 rangers and militia capture Loyalists at Great Canebrake, SC
              — Dec. 23-30 Snow Campaign, in SC, so-called because patriots are impeded by 15″ of snow
              — Dec. 30-31 American forces under Benedict Arnold fail to seize Quebec
              — Jan. 1 Daniel Morgan taken prisoner in attempt to take Quebec City
              — Jan. 15 Paine’s “Common Sense” published
              — Feb. 27 The patriots drive the Loyalists from Moore’s Creek Bridge, North Carolina
              — March 3 The Continental fleet captures New Providence Island in the Bahamas
              — March 17 The British evacuate Boston; British Navy moves to Halifax, Canada
              — June 8 Patriots fail to take Three Rivers, Quebec
              — June 12 The Virginia Declaration of Rights
              — June 28 Sullivan’s Island, SC, failed British naval attack
              — June 29 The First Virginia Constitution
              — June 28 Patriots decisively defeat the British Navy at Fort Moultrie, South Carolina
              — July 1 At the instigation of British agents, the Cherokee attack along the entire southern frontier
              — July 1-4 Congress debates and revises the Declaration of Independence. See Chronology of the Declaration
              — July 4 Congress adopts the Declaration of Independence; it’s sent to the printer
              — July 8 The Declaration of Independence is read publicly
              — July 15 Lyndley’s Fort, SC, Patriots fend off attack by Indians and Tories dressed as Indians
              — Aug. 1 Ambushed by Cherokees, Patriots are saved by a mounted charge at Seneca, SC
              — Aug. 2 Delegates begin to sign The Declaration of Independence
              — Aug. 10 Tugaloo River, SC, Andrew Pickens defeats Cherokees
              — Aug. 12? Andrew Pickens’ detachment surrounded by 185 Cherokee Indians, forms a ring and fires outward. It is known as the “Ring Fight.”
              — Aug. 12 Col. Williamson and Andrew Pickens defeat Cherokee Indians and burn Tamassy, an Indian town
              — Aug. 27 Redcoats defeat the George Washington’s army in the Battle of Long Island. Washington’s army escapes at night.
              — Sept. 15 The British occupy New York City
              — Sept. 16 Generals George Washington, Nathanael Greene, and Israel Putnam triumphantly hold their ground at the Battle of Harlem Heights
              — Sept. 19 Col. Williamson’s patriots attacked by Cherokees at Coweecho River, NC
              — Oct. 11 Benedict Arnold defeated at the Battle of Valcour Island (Lake Champlain), but delayed British advance
              — Oct. 28 The Americans retreat from White Plains, New York. British casualties (~300) higher than American (~200).
              — Nov. 16 The Hessians capture Fort Washington, NY
              — Nov. 20 Lord Cornwallis captures Fort Lee from Nathanael Greene
              — Dec. 26 Washington crosses the Delaware and captures Trenton from Hessians
              — Jan. 3 Washington victorious at Princeton
              — Jan. 6-May 28 Washington winters in Morristown, NJ
              — Apr. 27 Benedict Arnold’s troops force a British retreat at Ridgefield, Connecticut.
              — May 20 Treaty of DeWitt’s Corner, SC: Cherokees lose most of their land east of the mountains
              — June 14 Flag Resolution
              — July 5 St. Clair surrenders Fort Ticonderoga to the British
              — July 27 Lafayette arrives in Philadelphia
              — Aug. 6 The Redcoats, with Iroquois support, force the patriots back at Oriskany, NY, but then have to evacuate
              — Aug. 16 American Militia under General Stark victorious at the Battle of Bennington, VT (actually fought in Walloomsac, New York, several miles to the west)
              — Aug. 23 British withdraw from Fort Stanwix, NY, upon hearing of Benedict Arnold’s approach
              — Aug. 25 British General Howe lands at Head of Elk, Maryland
              — Sept. 11 The British win the Battle of Brandywine, Pennsylvania
              — Sept. 16 Rain-out at the Battle of the Clouds, Pennsylvania
              — Sept. 19 Burgoyne checked by Americans under Gates at Freeman’s Farm, NY. This is part of the “Battles of Saratoga.”
              — Sept. 21 Paoli Massacre, PA
              — Sept. 26 British under Howe occupy Philadelphia
              — Oct. 4 Americans driven off at the Battle of Germantown
              — Oct. 7 Burgoyne loses second battle of Freeman’s Farm, NY (at Bemis Heights). This is part of the “Battles of Saratoga.”
              — Oct. 17 Burgoyne surrenders to American General Gates at Saratoga, NY
              — Oct. 22 Hessian attack on Fort Mercer, NJ repulsed
              — Nov. 16 British capture Fort Mifflin, Pennsylvania
              — Dec. 5-7 Americans repulse British at Whitemarsh, Pennsylvania
              — Dec. 19 Washington’s army retires to winter quarters at Valley Forge
              — Feb. 6 The United States and France sign the French Alliance
              — March 7 British General William Howe replaced by Henry Clinton
              — May 20 Battle of Barren Hill, Pennsylvania. Lafayette with 500 men and about 50 Oneida Indians successfully evade British onslaught
              — June 18 British abandon Philadelphia and return to New York
              — June 19 Washington’s army leaves Valley Forge
              — June 28 The Battle of Monmouth Court House ends in a draw
              — July 4 George Rogers Clark captures Kaskaskia, a French village south of St. Louis
              — Aug. 8 French and American forces besiege Newport, RI
              — Dec. 29 The redcoats occupy Savannah
              — Feb. 3 Maj. Gen. Moultrie defeats British detachment at Port Royal Island, SC
              — Feb. 14 Patriots Andrew Pickens and Elijah Clarke beat Loyalists at Kettle Creek, GA
              — Feb. 23-24 American George Rogers Clark captures Vincennes (in what is now Indiana) on the Wabash in the Western campaign
              — March 3 British Lt. Col. Jacques Marcus Prevost defeats Americans under Gen. John Ashe at Brier Creek, GA
              — May 11-13 Maj. General Augustin Prévost (brother of Jacques, see above) breaks his siege when American forces under Maj. Gen. Lincoln approaches
              — June 20 Stono River, SC, Maj. Gen. Lincoln inflicts extensive British casualties in indecisive battle
              — June 21 Spain declares war on Great Britain
              — July 8 Fairfield, CT, burned by British
              — July 11 Norwalk, CT, burned by British
              — July 15-16 American “Mad” Anthony Wayne captures Stony Point, NY
              — Aug. 19 “Light Horse” Harry Lee attacks Paulus Hook, NJ
              — Aug. 29 Newtown, NY, after two massacres, American forces burn Indian villages
              — Sept. 23 John Paul Jones, aboard the Bonhomme Richard, captures British man-of-war Serapisnear English coast
              — Sept. 28 The Tappan Massacre (“No Flint” Grey kills 30 Americans by bayonet)
              — Oct. 9 American attempt to recapture Savannah, GA fails
              — Nov.-June 23, 1780 Washington’s 2nd winter at Morristown, NJ (the harshest winter of the 18th century)
              — May 12 British capture Charleston, SC
              — May 29 British crush Americans at Waxhaw Creek, SC
              — June 20 Patriots rout Tories at Ramseur’s Mill, NC
              — July 11 French troops arrive at Newport, RI, to aid the American cause
              — Aug. 6 Patriots defeat Tories at Hanging Rock, SC
              — Aug. 16 British rout Americans at Camden, SC
              — Sept. 23 John André arrested, leading to the exposure of Benedict Arnold’s plans to cede West Point to the British
              — Oct. 7 King’s Mountain, SC: battle lasts 65 minutes. American troops led by Isaac Shelby and John Sevier defeat Maj. Patrick Ferguson and one-third of General Cornwallis’s army
              — Oct. 14 Washington names Nathanael Greene commander of the Southern Army
              — Jan. 1 Mutiny of unpaid Pennsylvania soldiers
              — Jan. 17 Patriot Morgan overwhelmingly defeats British Col. Tarleton at Cowpens, SC
              — Feb. 1 The Battle of Cowan’s Ford, Huntersville, NC
              — March 2 Articles of Confederation adopted
              — March 15 British win costly victory at Guilford Courthouse, NC
              — April 25 Greene defeated at Hobkirk’s Hill, SC
              — May 15 British Major Andrew Maxwell cedes Fort Granby, SC to patriot Lieutenant Colonel Henry Lee
              — June 6 Americans recapture Augusta, GA
              — June 18 British hold off Americans at Ninety Six, SC
              — July 6 “Mad” Anthony Wayne repulsed at Green Springs Farm, VA
              — Sept. 8 Greene defeated at Eutaw Springs, SC
              — Sept. 15 French fleet drives British naval force from Chesapeake Bay
              — Oct. 19 Cornwallis surrounded on land and sea by Americans and French and surrenders at Yorktown, VA
              — March 20 Lord North resigns as British prime minister
              — July 11 British evacuate Savannah, GA
              — Nov. 30 British and Americans sign preliminary Articles of Peace
              — Dec. 14 British leave Charleston, SC
              — April 19 Congress ratifies preliminary peace treaty
              — Sept. 3 The United States and Great Britain sign the Treaty of Paris
              — Nov. 25 British troops leave New York City
              — Dec. 23 Washington resigns as Commander
              — Sept. 17 U.S. Constitution signed
              — June 21 U.S. Constitution adopted, when New Hampshire ratifies it

              • The path to liberty, or the change in individual hearts that led to our liberty? Or do you consider them to be the same thing?

                I ask because Adams said the path to changing the Colonists hearts did take years, but the actual declaration of our freedom happened with the stroke of some 50+ quills.

                I suppose this will open the door to another round of “how do you look at it.” In fact, I suppose it will always be this way until one side defeats the other. 😦

                • Truth should not be reduced to a prize in a battle of wills and words, Joe. It took 34 years of losing American patriot lives to get to the New Hampshire ratification. I wouldn’t get on the wrong side of history attempting to take that from their souls to prop up a point on the RNL.

                  Those 50 quills would not have made those strokes without the lives given ahead of that day.

                  • Augger,

                    I understand what you are saying, but even with that lead up, Liberty was one in an instant with the signing.

                    Now, I am not trying to play games with truth, or claim a prize. All I am doing is pointing out that Liberty is usually won in an instant. True, you have to build the spirit of liberty in the people, then you have to defend it after it has been won. But the prize itself is won with a single act, an act or a point we can isolate in history and say THERE is when they won their liberty!

                    This is not how liberty is lost. That usually takes a series of smaller steps. I cannot think of a time when the people decided they had lost their liberty when it hadn’t already been lost long before they realized it.

                    This is all I was getting at with my original post. I understand we disagree. I’m learning to live with that, I’m just not sure I can live where that way of looking at things is taking us. I’m not sure if any of us will be able to live where it is taking us.

                  • Augger, many of the original colonists came here in order to live, if not free, then free-er than they could in Europe Still loyal British subjects for the most part, they enjoyed the lack of constant oversight by the old country. That would be one increment, would it not?
                    Scrolling down your list of events and battles truly humbled and awed me, reminded me of what our ancestors did for the world.
                    Did you know that Jose Artigas, the Father of Uruguay, carried a copy of the Constitution in his pocket during his country’s struggle for independence from Argentina?
                    I side with you, bud. Our freedom was earned incrementally, by every death of a patriot, by every drop of their blood.

                    • You can actually go to that website (it has links to each individual event), and if you want to, parse out the individual battles and read the various meetings/discussions as see exactly how our path to freedom was deliberately (and incrementally) planned, and executed.

              • Yeah….that’s basically what I put up too.

                The point is when it was decided it was time to take action the action was taken and DECLARED. The war was fought. And then the Course and structure of the Government was debated and written and went through the years process as I stated….BUT …upon Ratification it was law as of the date declared by the specific State (Colony).

                Point of fact……….Freedom WAS Declared instantly with the Declaration….the Process of War…and the Process of writing the Constitution should not be construed as a time of NO Liberty………..Liberty had been won we were in the Process of Codifying and protecting it.

                Two Different things…………………….

                And it is Especially different now because our Law, Our Constitution is Already written…….illegal actions and illegal Legislation (wrt the Constitution) are not legitimate contestors for our Freedom…… they are and have been the actions of Usurpers. We don’t have to WIN our Freedom……we already have it !…………..We don’t have to ASK for it back….petition for it…….those who oppose our Freedom are illegitimate.

                • False syllogism. For example …

                  “I’m free from the tyrannical rule of President Obama as of right this moment that I declare it!”

                  Am I suddenly free, just because I declared it? What if 50 of us grab our quill pens and sign it? Does that suddenly make us free?

                  No. Freedom and liberty is fought for and won. Then it is fought for and preserved.

                  History repeats itself Don, and Joe. There’s no easy way around it.

                  • You’ve come full circle.

                    From a position of “incrementally” petitioning those who’ve stolen our liberty to ask for some of it back( and thus legitimizing them BTW)… a position of analogy with the 1776 generation which had to Use strong “Persuation” to drive the point home to George 3 that henceforth …. they were Free ! ! …………And that was an instantaneous Declaration.

                    For those of us who Do study history the maxim is ” History never repeats itself excatly ” ……. Thus my point that We ALREADY ARE free ….. we don’t have to WIN it…..we don’t have to Legitimize our claim….we aren’t petitioning for a Change…… We already OWN our Liberty ………. and those who stand in the way are Illegitimate.

                    In 1776 We were claiming something of ours FROM the Crown………….in 2013 …it already IS OURS …….. our Liberty has been illegally usurped. Remedy may require similar “persuations” ……… but the issue of Legitimacy is not up for question as it was in 1776…. We have inherited our Legitimate Claim to our rights via the Declaration……in that sense there is no need for a re-do.

                    • BTW….
                      It wasn’t just 50 Quill-laden Guys who Declared for our Independence but a third of the Population in some states, 50 % in others and even a Majority in some areas…………so those who signed had the support of Many.

                      Those who voted Obama about 66 million +/_……..those who voted OTHER than the messiah…….64 million +/_.

                    • “It wasn’t just 50 Quill-laden Guys who Declared for our Independence but a third of the Population in some states, “

                      An issue you should likely take up with Joe, Don. After all, this is what he stated:

                      “but the actual declaration of our freedom happened with the stroke of some 50+ quills.”

                      I just ran with it. Figured if we were talking the same language and all ….

    • Donald Trump Had a Golf-Game with Boehner and Determined him to be a Good Guy…..

      So there you have it…. end of case….the Tea Party is put on Notice by the Donald and needs to shut the F— Up Pronto because they done been FIRED by the Donald !!

    • Sen. Cruz’ dad was not a citizen of the US, was born in Cuba, I think. McCain was born outside the US, but to a serving military family, so he’s good to go, Obama was born in the US, his Dad was not a citizen, however.
      Does Jesse Ventura want the job? He’s all-Anerican!

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.