Mary Mostert is a nationally-respected political writer. She was one of the first female political commentators to be published in a major metropolitan newspaper in the 1960s. After working in President Lyndon Johnson's failed War on Poverty programs in New York state, she became a Republican. She ran, unsuccessfully, for the New York State Senate and became campaign manager for a number of candidates. She once served as the secretary of "Positive Action NOW!"--a South African women's group that sought to reduce the hostility among South Africa's various racial, religious, and political groups.
In recent years, Mary has researched, written, and edited articles for national talk show host Michael Reagan's Information Interchange on the Internet, and for The REAGAN MONITOR, a monthly newsletter that provides in-depth information on key issues. Her book, COMING HOME - Families Can Stop the Unraveling of America," was published in 1996 by Gold Leaf Press. Mary maintains a political media site, Banner of Liberty. She can be contacted at
mary@bannerofliberty.com
. Click here for more information.
To: Alpine School District: American Fork, Utah Superintendent Henshaw, and Board Members
Because I am the author of books on the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, recently I was contacted by some residents of the Alpine School district who are concerned about the District’s Mission statement: “Educating all students to ensure the future of our democracy”. (http://www.alpine.k12.ut.us/phpApps/genericPage.php?pdid=2789)
I wrote an e-mail to your public relations people, whose e-mails are listed below the mission statement pointing out that the Alpine School District is not IN a Democracy, but in a Republic which is clearly guaranteed by Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States:
“The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.”
The Constitution of the State of Utah in Article I, Section 2 says :
“The State of Utah is an inseparable part of the Federal Union and the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the Land .”
Article III paragraph 4 of the Utah Constitution, which lists four irrevocable ordinances unique to Utah, states:
“The Legislature shall make laws for the establishment and maintenance of a system of public schools, which shall be open to all the children of the State and be free from sectarian control.”
Sectarian Control not only pertains to control of the schools by any religious sect, but any other sect, i.e. any group, party or faction united by a specific doctrine or under a doctrinal leader. (Utah Constitution: http://le.utah.gov/~code/const/00I01.htm)
From the response I received from Michelle Gray and from other information on your website, it appears that the Alpine School District has violated both the precepts of the U.S. Constitution, and the precepts of the Utah Constitution by implementing sectarian support of a specific doctrine that is contrary to the precepts of a republican form of government guaranteed by the Constitution.
I realize that there are many people today who do not understand the Constitution or the differences between a democracy and a republic. Yet, I note that you yourselves run the Alpine School Board on republican, not democratic, principles. You have school board meetings, policies and decisions that are not democratically decided by all the people in your district. They are decided by you, who are elected representatives of the people living in your district. You appear to want to teach the children a doctrine you don’t practice yourselves.
I recently wrote the two paragraphs below to help some younger people who asked what the difference was between a democracy and a republic. I am somewhat surprised to learn that these differences are not very well understood by those who wrote and adopted your mission statement. Here’s the difference:
The following references are from my 1848 dictionary which explains more clearly than modern dictionaries the differences that the Founding Fathers were debating when they replaced the Articles of Confederation in 1787 because the nation was beginning to slide into anarchy, a common cause in the failure of democratic nations:
A democracy is government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is in the hands of the people.
A republic, from the Latin words les publica means “a public affair;” in which the sovereign power is exercised by representatives elected by the people.
In France and Quebec, Canada, Bastille Day is celebrated as ”the birth of democracy.” The historic event celebrated on Bastille day is:
In France on July 14, 1789 a mob of 8,800 people stormed the Bastille, a fortress-prison in Paris built by and a symbol of the Bourbons. The mob freed the prisoners, seized the ammunition stored there, wrecked the building and killed the guards. The “law” and the prison were created by the Bourbon kings that ruled France from 1589 to 1793. The law and the prison were democratically demolished by the people of Paris.
There were no representatives. The people of Paris, having seized supreme power by force, removed the king, guillotined him, and took control of the city. This started the French Revolution, which actually was a civil war in which more than 17,000 men, women and children were seized by factional groups and beheaded.
In America, in 1776, a group of 55 men of the Second Continental Congress, who were elected by the people to represent the 2.5 million people of the 13 colonies, met in Philadelphia and wrote a document that declared the end of the rule of kings that inherited their position of power. Although not all the people in the colonies WANTED independence, they did not reject the document, though eventually many did move to Canada.
In 1777 the Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Confederation as its form of government. There was no judiciary or executive included in the Articles. There was a treasury and the Congress was given the right to decide matters of peace and war and other decisions. By 1787 the weakness and ineffectiveness and democratic lack of unity of the Articles of Confederation led to the new nation starting to slide into anarchy
To save the country from anarchy, a Constitutional Convention made up of 55 men selected by their State Assemblies, met to write the Constitution. At no point in the founding of this nation was democracy ever part of the process.
I received a brief paragraph from Michelle Gray that didn’t address the issue, but simply re-enforced the confusion of the mission statement. I had written to point out that our nation was not founded as a democracy. In fact, a great deal of effort was put into writing a document that tried to make SURE that the nation never deteriorated to the level of a democracy.
She wrote back, on the same day (February 18) a paragraph I notice has been added on your website:
“The Mission Statement was drafted after meeting with a committee comprised of district administrators and Board of Education members. The mission statement is inclusive of the Moral Dimensions of Teaching (that echo the values of our district in addition to setting the performance standards and directing the implementation of our mission). It was adopted by the full Board of Education in an open board meeting and has been shared with the District Community Council as well as all School Community Councils in the district. It has been met with favorable comments with few exceptions.”
So, I gather you folks are the authors of the statement which proclaims the Alpine School District mission is to train students in your district to ignore both the US Constitution and the State of Utah Constitution? If you really believe so strongly that we need to become a democracy, don’t you think it would be appropriate to allow the parents of the Alpine School District to democratically follow the example of the founding of the French democracy and take direct physical action? Or, perhaps you could open this discussion up based on the current republican form of school board control and allow public discussion and a vote on what the school district’s mission is?
Mary Mostert
Author: A Hunger for Liberty Leads to the Declaration of Independence & The Threat of Anarchy Leads to the US Constitution
March 17, 2009
Glenn Beck and 21st century version of Founding Fathers' "Committee on Correspondence" By Mary Mostert
On Friday 13th, ordinary Americans throughout the country gathered in groups in homes and other meeting places to hear talk show host Glenn Beck of Fox News call them to become the people we were "On 9/12 (2001 when) no one in the government had to tell us what to do. We just did it. We went and we found a place to give blood. We went and we gave money. We gathered together. We gathered our family around. We prayed. We were the people that our grandparents were and nobody had to tell us."
And then, politicians began to do what they often like to do best — tell us what to do. President George W. Bush urged us to "do our patriotic duty and go shopping." Soon we were back to the political game of arguing over who the villains and the victims are and which party could best identify and resolve problems facing us. In recent years We, the People, seem to have lost our independence and our confidence and have turned increasingly to "experts" in education, finance, government, politics, health and the media to tell us what to do, how to do it, when to do it and how much to pay for the privilege of being "taken care of."
What Glenn Beck did on Friday was to call the people back to the principles this nation was founded on. We really CAN:
1. Know that God helped the Founding Fathers create this great nation and He will help us save it if we ask for His help, as did George Washington and others of the Founding Fathers.
2. Choose what type of American we want to be. We can be free and independent, or we can be wards of the state in heavy debt for the rest of our lives.
3. Choose courageous leaders who lead us TOWARDS unity, honor and integrity, rather than leaders who create contention, factions and hatred for others with different views.
4. Restore honor, integrity and courage in our government by first restoring those qualities in ourselves, our families, and our own communities.
I attended the meeting for the Salt Lake City group that met Friday at Noah's in Sandy, Utah. They were expecting about 600 people. According to one of the Noah's employees, there were 800 there 15 minutes before the program started and people were still coming in during the first 30 minutes of the show. I enjoyed what Glenn Beck had to say, but I was amazed at what the audience was doing.
I had contributed 550 copies of the first printing of my book, A Hunger for Liberty Leads to the Declaration of Independence, and every copy was snatched up and people were asking for copies until long after the show ended. Before the show started, they were reading the books.
As I watched and listened to hundreds of people who seemed to have not only a great thirst for information, but a desire to come together and CHANGE what is happening to them, they reminded me of what happened before the Declaration of Independence was written.
My book starts with the history of the French and Indian War that began in 1753 and led to the Seven Years War in Europe, which was the world's first World War which involved India and Britain's East India Company over trade issues. As a result, there not only was a massive debt but also trade monopoly issues as a result of that war. When King George III became king after his father died in 1760, he and his ministers were trying to figure out a way to pay for the wars fought in the 1750s while maintaining trade monopolies for the East India Company.
George III and his ministers came up with an 18th century form of a stimulus plan, to solve the problem: Taxing the American colonies, while limiting their ability to trade. The Sugar Act, passed in 1764, was designed to raise money while limiting the American Colonies ability to buy French Sugar. This was followed by a series of acts: the Stamp Act, the Quartering Act , and the Townshend Acts. The Colonists responded by boycotting tea the East India Company monopoly brought in. The East India was losing so much money it was on the verge of bankruptcy in 1773, so Parliament responded by taxing the tea at its source in India, and not allowing any ships other than ships owned by the East India Company to bring tea to the port at Boston. Three East India Company ships, laden with tea, sailed into Boston Harbor in late 1773. The owners were sure the colonists would purchase the tea, however, they did not. In December of 1773 seven thousand people attended a town meeting in Boston and asked British Governor Hutchinson to send the ships back to England. He refused.
This led to the Boston Tea Party and Parliament retaliated with a series of oppressive acts against Massachusetts, beginning with the passage of The Boston Port Act on March 31, 1774, which closed Boston Harbor, and the Massachusetts Government Act passed on May 20, 1774 that eliminated any self-government in Massachusetts. These acts were called the "Coercive Acts" in Britain and the "Intolerable Acts" in the Colonies.
As these events took place over a period of about 14 years, a little noted event took place on March 4, 1773 when Dabney Carr, a friend of Thomas Jefferson, rose in the Virginia House of Burgesses and moved that they form a Committee of Correspondence and Inquiry. The Committee would be "tasked with contacting the legislatures of each colony so that they could join Virginia and offer concerted opposition toward British encroachments. "
That correspondence committee suggested by Dabney Carr saw the need for a meeting of delegates, which led to the formation of the First Continental Congress composed of 56 delegates who met in Carpenter's Hall in Philadelphia on September 5, 1774. They passed the Declaration and Resolves which laid the groundwork for the Declaration of Independence which would be passed two years later by the Second Continental Congress.
As I watched the audience respond to Glenn Beck's 9/12 Project and talked with many of them following the meeting, I saw a 21st Century version of the organization of the Committee of Correspondence and Inquiry suggested by Dabney Carr that led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence.
The Declaration of Independence states: "Mankind is more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by altering forms to which they are accustomed." On Friday I saw a thousand Americans who have suffered enough from media, government, and political party lies, arrogance and spending that they seem ready work for, and vote for, some REAL change.
We certainly are experiencing a "change" with George W. Bush back in Texas and Barack Obama in the White House. But... is the "change" what Obama supporters had in mind when they voted for him?
Of course many Obama supporters may not be interested in what happens in the Stock Market, since they, and Obama, appear to believe the denizens of Wall Street are the "shameful" group that has caused the economic problems we are now experiencing. On the other hand, those Wall Street denizens seem to have a wary view of Obama and his supporters. Today, because millions now own stocks, what happens on Wall Street impacts far more people than it once did.
For example, twenty five years ago, on February 27, 1984, a total of 99,140,000 shares were sold and the stock market closed at $ 1,179.96. Today, February 25th, a total of 7,483,640,000 shares were sold and the stock market closed at $7,270.89, down from 9,625.28 on election day.
When George W. Bush first entered the White House on January 20, 2001, the Stock Market had closed the day before at 10,587.59. On September 1, 2001 the market closed at 10,033.27 and fell, after 9/11 to 8,235.81 after the World Trade Center, considered worldwide to be the heart of America's financial power, was destroyed. The Market managed to climb back in about six months to 10,635.25 in mid-March of 2002 and peaked on October 7, 2007 only 18 months ago when it peaked at $14,164.53. .
Prior to the 2008 election, on September 20, the Stock Market closed at 10,850.66. Then, in October 2008 the polls began showing that Barack Obama would win the election, and by Election Day November 4th the market closed at 9,625.28. Since his election, it appears that every time he gives a speech, the market falls, closing today at 7,270.89. People with 401Ks who thought they had a comfortable retirement income a year and a half ago have lost almost 50% of their retirement investments.
What kind of "change" will reverse this loss of assets in both stocks and housing? Can it really be reversed by adding huge amount of debt that we and our children will pay interest on for many years? How will the debt be paid? Where will the money come from if we have other disasters, such as the hurricane destruction of New Orleans or more devastating terrorist attacks like 9/11?
In past years we've handled public debt by printing money, and creating inflation. Homes built 25 years ago that sold for less than $20,000, often today are mortgaged for $200,000 or more. Certainly this is "change" but is probably not the change that the voters had in mind when they voted for Barack Obama. As even Democrats and ardent supporters have been pointing out today following his speech to Congress, whatever happens now it's going to be President Obama's responsibility.
However, what he said in his speech and what he has done in his actions are quite contradictory so far. For example he said in his speech: "Well that day of reckoning has arrived, and the time to take charge of our future is here. Now is the time to act boldly and wisely — to not only revive this economy, but to build a new foundation for lasting prosperity. Now is the time to jump start job creation, re-start lending, and invest in areas like energy, health care, and education that will grow our economy, even as we make hard choices to bring our deficit down. That is what my economic agenda is designed to do, and that's what I'd like to talk to you about tonight. It's an agenda that begins with jobs. "
While he seems to realize the future depends on HIS actions, not George W. Bush, and TALKS about investing in areas like energy and job creation, he has already cancelled without discussion contracts approved by the Bush administration to develop oil shale reserves in Utah. There actually is more available oil in oil shale in Utah than there is in oil wells in Saudi Arabia. Development and use of Utah, Colorado and Wyoming oil reserves could supply unlimited amounts of inexpensive oil which would help rebuild our economy.
The extraction of the oil, by using modern technology, perhaps even something like the South African Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) could be a very fast, clean, safe and a cost-effective new industry that quickly creates numerous jobs. Yet, literally while TALKING about job creation in his speech, Obama's actual policy was to cancel Bush era Utah oil shale contracts that would have produced jobs and cheap gasoline.
Unfortunately, President Obama has no experience whatsoever in job creation or private industry and it is already becoming obvious. His only real work experience has been as a Chicago community organizer using tactics developed by Saul Alinsky who wrote "Rules for Radicals." Alinsky's goal was to teach " the Have-Nots how to take it away from the Haves" through "community organizing," a term he coined. The purpose of community organization is to "engage power structures effectively" i.e. to force a power structure, usually some level of government or business, to DO what the organized "Have-Not" group is demanding and can't or won't do themselves.
Obama explained in his book the generally unsuccessful efforts he made to organize tenants of the Altgeld Garden Public Housing project in south Chicago. He tried to develop more jobs and improve conditions in the 2000 unit project. The purpose of the organization was to put pressure on the managers of the project and the government officials responsible to improve the living conditions and create jobs. It didn't work.
So far, President Obama has been using community organization techniques in addressing the current problems he is facing as president. While he knows that community organization techniques are designed to create pressure on government officials — he doesn't seem to realize that he now IS the top government official the have-nots would need to pressure.
In his Blueprint for Change and his actions since being sworn in, Obama has chosen Wall Street and millions of people in the USA who now own stock as the "shameful" enemy, the Haves. On the other hand his many supporters, including those who have already lost nearly 50% of their 401k stock assets and may lost their homes, are seeing themselves as the have-nots and are expecting Obama to DO something that will recover their assets. Since Community Organizers need a villain to organize opposition to, this is an important issue.
Almost every successful business leader I know and those in the tax bracket Obama plans to raise taxes on is planning investment strategies to thwart Obama's plan. The simplest way to avoid the taxes is to cut back on work hours, trim costs and lay off the least productive workers to keep income from being confiscated by new taxes. The top earners already are paying 40% of their income in taxes. If, as he has promised, Obama increases their taxes, they will figure out ways to decrease their income to avoid more taxation. The result will be less, not more money going to the government.
So far, in the past five months, "stimulus bills" have been passed that authorize spending more than two TRILLION dollars. Yet, Obama and the Democrats tell us that 95% of us will have our taxes cut, the other 5% will have their taxes raised and by 2012 he will halve the deficit. This does not compute. Obama also seems to think doctors will willingly take on more patients through his socialized medicine plans, even if they would end up with less money due to his tax increases.
Most high-earning taxpayers tend to be independent, hard-working people who are careful money managers. They also usually manage to figure out legal ways around confiscatory taxes and there are now millions of people with 401K retirement plans or are retired seniors living off income from their stocks who feel they are now Have-Nots. And, there are more of them thinking up ways to avoid taxes than there are government officials thinking up ways to raise taxes. For example, Obama announced in his Blueprint for Change during the campaign that he plans to double the capital gains tax. In the past 5 months investors have sold billions in stock to pay the current lower tax on their capital gains.
It is going to be interesting to see how this all actually plays out in the real world of finance. The current "power structure" that a good community organizer would pressure to fix Wall Street, the mortgages market and the economy is Barack Obama. He may soon learn what it feels like to be the target of angry people demanding that he fix their problems.
THE CONTENT OF THIS WEBSITE DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE OPINION OF THE OWNER ... At least that's what my lawyer told me, but he was drinking pretty heavily at the time so...
COPYRIGHT HARDIN REPUBLIC, LLC 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. All Rights Reserved.
February 23rd, 2010