Syte Reitz

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world…….

Browsing Posts tagged Steve Forbes

Impeachment Back in the News

Impeachment is back in the news.
To impeach, or not to impeach?
Articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama were filed just a few weeks ago by a group of black American citizens, the National Black Republican Association (NBRA).
Throughout August, conservative constituents at towns halls have also been pressuring members of Congress to impeach the President.

  • What has Barack Obama done to deserve this public outcry?
  • What did other recent impeachment candidates do to deserve impeachment?
  • How do Barack Obama’s offenses compare with the offenses of the last two Presidents to be impeached?
  • Could impeachment of President Obama succeed, and what would it accomplish?

Blatant Lies and Lost Credibility

At the very least, whether successful or not, impeachment attempts expose the blatant lies and reflect the loss of credibility of a President.

 Obama Impeachment

Blatant lies told by Presidents undermine not only their own authority, but also the Office of President of the United States.
Presidential lies undermine the credibility and moral integrity of our entire nation.

Comparing Articles of Impeachment

The articles of impeachment summarize accusations  made during an impeachment:

.

richard-nixon-pointing

Richard M. Nixon
Articles of Impeachment:

  • Obstruction of Justice
  • Abuse of Power
  • Contempt of Congress

 “He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to ... cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

-Articles of Impeachment against Richard M. Nixon, adopted by the House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974. Article II, Section 1

Results: Richard Nixon’s impeachment did not go to the House or Senate for trial, because Nixon first resigned in disgrace.

.

index

 

William J. “Bill” Clinton
Articles of Impeachment:

  • Perjury
  • Obstruction of Justice

The judge wrote:
“Simply put, the president’s deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. (Monica) Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false….”

Results: Bill Clinton was Impeached by the House of Representatives, and acquitted by the U.S. Senate.  He received a contempt of court citation, and a suspension of his Arkansas law license, as well as a suspension from the U.S. Supreme Court bar.
Bill Clinton did not resign, and today seems unashamed of his misdeeds.
Incredibly, half of America seems to have little problem with Clinton’s moral and legal transgressions, as he continues to play a prominent role in the Democrat Party today in 2013, despite the public demolition of his integrity.
.

obama_cropped_blog_main_horizontal

.

Barack H. Obama
Articles of Impeachment filed by a “black American citizens”:

  • Obstruction of Benghazi investigation
  • Disclosure of grand jury material
  • Authorization of DOJ to conduct Fast and Furious
  • Authorization of IRS to release confidential information ot unauthorized individuals and organization
  • Initiation of  discriminatory IRS audits
  • Permission of unjustified NSA surveillance of 300 million average Americans
  • Permission of DOJ to spy on over one hundred Associated Press Journalists and on Fox News Reporter James Rosen
  • Thwarting Congress by failing to enforce laws including the Defense of Marriage Act, No Child Left Behind Act, and Affordable Care Act, and by directing immigrations officers to stop enforcing immigration law when Congress refused to pass his Dream Act.
  • Violations of the Constitution, bypassing the US Senate to appoint 3 members of the National Labor Relations board and to appoint Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection bureau.
  • Intimidation of whistle blowers and bringing twice as many prosecutions against whistle blowers as all prior presidents combined.

WOW

Ten Articles of Impeachment.
That’s a first.
Black Americans accusing the first black President of tyranny and of despotism.
That’s even more of a first.

This nation has been very proud of theObama serious historically significant 2008 Presidential election, in which our first black President was elected.  America prides itself on freedom, on fairness, and on opportunity.  I am the child of poor Lithuanian immigrants, and love America deeply for it’s just (Judeo-Christian) system of government and law, and the resulting opportunities it offers to those who work hard and follow the rules.  My entire family has risen from poor immigrants to successful and prosperous Americans in less than one generation, thanks to the opportunities offered by this country.  Despite my conservative political beliefs, even I was impressed with this aspect of the 2008 Presidential election outcome-a tribute to what children of all backgrounds can achieve in the United States – because we have a fair and just country.

Reasons Not to Impeach

What a tragedy and heartache it would be if the first black President abused the office so badly that he had to be impeached.  This is the sentiment that probably prevents most of us from discussing the impeachment of Barack Obama.  Some Obama supporters state candidly that they refrain from opposing the President because he is black.  When black Americans start proposing impeachment, we know this man has really abused the authority granted to him as President. And when liberal black leaders start proposing impeachment, this man has really crossed the line.

If a Lithuanian were ever elected President, I (as a Lithuanian) would be pretty reluctant, pretty ashamed, and pretty hard-pressed to demand his impeachment.

Reasons to Impeach

Slide1Yes, I would be reluctant to impeach a Lithuanian.

But I would demand the impeachment nevertheless, because I know that true equality includes accountability and includes keeping ALL leaders subject to the law, not just some.

Lithuanians, or blacks, or any other group of human beings, are not well served by condoning the misdeeds of one of their members.  Protection of offenders carries the unspoken implication that the entire group is complicit.  Protection sends the message that the entire group is not capable of responsible and accountable behavior. Excusing unacceptable behavior can even carry the bigoted implication that better cannot be expected from this minority person.
Wise minorities, whether Lithuanian or black, would demand accountability from their President, in order to demonstrate that the malefactor is the exception, not the rule, in their group.

And So, Black Americans Accuse President Obama of a Long Train of Abuses and Usurpations

National Black Republican Association:
Slide1

We, black American citizens, in order to free ourselves and our fellow citizens from governmental tyranny, do herewith submit these Articles of Impeachment to Congress for the removal of President Barack H. Obama, aka, Barry Soetoro, from office for his attack on liberty and commission of egregious acts of despotism that constitute high crimes and misdemeanors.

On July 4, 1776, the founders of our nation declared their independence from governmental tyranny and reaffirmed their faith in independence with the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791.  Asserting their right to break free from the tyranny of a nation that denied them the civil liberties that are our birthright, the founders declared:

“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.”  –  Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

Comparison of Charges

All three recent impeachment candidates, Nixon, Clinton and Obama, were clearly guilty of lies, and of mis-using the power of the Office of President.
Details of the accusations vary, and some overlap.

All three broke the law.
All three lied.

Slide1

The articles of impeachment above show many MORE accusations against President Barack Obama than against Nixon and Clinton.

They include IRS discrimination, NSA spying, prosecution of whistleblowers, wiretapping of journalists, the torture program and the Benghazi cover-up. Obama’s troubles do not seem to stem from one error as in the case of Nixon or Clinton, but from numerous errors and numerous cover-ups.  The list of articles of impeachment reflect a pervasive and systematically unscrupulous administration.  Phrases like Chicago tactics, Imperial Presidency, and Gangster Government surface in the news.

Bellver Lucifer

Lucifer – Ricardo Bellver, Madrid, 1877

Perhaps this is not so surprising after all, in reference to the man, Obama, who used to teach  Alinksy Tactics (aka Satan’s handbook, or the antithesis of the Ten Commandments) in Chicago.

It is interesting to note that accusations against Nixon did include “income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner,” an accusation very similar to the IRS discrimination recently tolerated and probably initiated by the Obama administration.

There has been much discussion of President Obama’s misdeeds and misrepresentations.  One discussion compares President Obama with President Nixon extensively, in an article entitled Obama’s Watergates, in which numerous parallels are drawn between Nixon and Obama.   The author, Victor Davis Hanson,  a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University, calls the Obama administration’s methods and aims “Nixonian to the core.”

Hanson predicts that the scandals, beginning with Benghazi, and continuing with the IRS, the Associated Press and James Rosen, as well as with Edward Snowden and the NSA, will not end until “the truth sets us all free.”  He predicts a long-drawn-out and sordid saga.

So Could An Impeachment Succeed?

Theoretically, an impeachment could succeed; this President has left such a “long train of abuses and usurpations” that he has been accused of an Imperial Presidency (characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows).
Obama is even despised by Vladimir Putin; Putin’s is not a respectful dislike, as might be expected toward a competitor, but actually a scorn and contempt towards Obama as a “weak ruler of Sodom & Gomorrah.”  There’s another first – Putin moralizing at the United States!

photo_1378286057088-1-HD

Obama’s extensive collection of offenses, and of domestic and global enemies, certainly makes impeachment seem possible, and even desirable.
Obama’s bad boy résumé is much longer than Clinton’s or Nixon’s, and he seems to be less well liked than Clinton was.  Obama’s popularity has been slipping rapidly this summer, and has particularly suffered during the present Syria crisis.

Yet, impeachment is not likely to go forward.
In addition to our collective and bipartisan reluctance to impeach the first black President, an impeachment is also likely to fail for the same reasons that Clinton’s impeachment failed in the Senate.

Not because Clinton or Obama are innocent of charges made against them, but because the Democrat party seems to have redefined moral standards in recent decades, and now the Democrat-dominated Senate is not likely convict a member of their own party, no matter how heinous his offense.

Democrats have forgotten the principle that all authority must be held accountable to the law.
Democrats  have substituted in it’s place the principle “the ends justify the means.”

Morality Redefined

The Democrat Party, previously commended for some virtuous policies including concern for the poor, and previously not in favor of abortion, seems to have abandoned numerous traditional Judeo-Christian ethics in recent years:

6a011570579907970b017742bf5159970d-800wi

  • The word GOD was almost struck from the Democrat party platform in 2012.
  • Abortion, the killing of pre-born citizens, is now prioritized and actively promoted by the Democrat party.
  • Redefinition of marriage is now favored by Democrats.
  • Our nation’s work ethic has now been damaged by excessive Democrat handouts, which surpass relief of poverty and resemble more the purchasing of votes.
  • Taxation and governmental control of all aspects of society have been taken to new heights, which border on totalitarianism, and violate the principle of subsidiarity, a founding principle of the United States and today a founding principle of the European Union.
  • Under Democrats we have recently suffered attacks on religious liberties of Americans, which border on Communism and which violate the moral principle of tolerance.
  • Totalitarianism and religious persecution in the name of government are incompatible with the definition of democracy.
  • Gangster methodology seems to be in routine use now by the Obama Administration, a methodology in direct conflict with the Constitution, with the laws of the United States, and with Ten Commandments.

This redefined morality is outlined in Saul Alinsky’s  book  Rules for Radicals.  Alinsky’s book was dedicated, in fact, to Lucifer, a alternate name for Satan. Incidentally, Barack Obama taught Alinsky tactics in Chicago.

Alinsky dedication
The Alinsky method welcomes dishonest tactics, unlawful behavior, perjury and obstruction of justice in the service of furthering one’s political goals.

Yes, morality HAS been redefined.

Morality Inversion

We now have a  Morality Inversion, the substitution of Democrat/Alinsky morality for traditional Judeo-Christian Morality.Slide1
Under morality inversion, something is wrong only if you think that it is wrong, and you are allowed to prioritize your own agenda above the law.
Under a morality where unlawfulness is allowed, the only order is the order chosen and imposed by those in power. i.e. totalitarianism.
Half of America seems to be on board with this.
They don’t seem to realize that granting dictatorial powers to a President you like today will also extend dictatorial powers to the President you DON’T like tomorrow.

With Morality Inversion, Impeachment Becomes an Oxymoron

Morality Inversion says that it’s O.K. to break laws when it feels right.
Impeachment says the opposite, that you remove officials for breaking laws.
So which is it to be?
You cannot have both.
You cannot impeach a President for lying and breaking laws if it’s O.K. to lie and break laws.
That’s why the Senate, dominated by Democrats (who have actually become radical Progressives in recent years), failed to convict Clinton during Clinton’s impeachment, and are almost certain to acquit Obama if impeachment were attempted.  The House, dominated by Conservatives, did impeach Clinton for his offenses.

santa_claus_patriarchal_morality_630495If Judeo-Christian morality is already on it’s way out, and the Senate refuses to impeach a President who has broken laws and who has not upheld the Constitution, then impeachment becomes an oxymoron and a contradiction.
So impeachment is not particularly useful at this moment in history; restoration of morality is needed first.
And that’s what our Pope is working on.

Bottom Line

The bottom line is that half our nation now tolerates and votes for people who lie and who break laws.
Whether it’s intentional or not, that half of our nation is tolerating anarchy (lawlessness).
They like what President Obama is decreeing now: handouts and lollipops for everybody, just vote for me!
For now, those receiving handouts will not tolerate impeachment, and impeachment is not likely to succeed.

Slide1

Aside: Even if impeachment were to succeed, the successors to the impeached President in this moral climate are just more of the same: The Bidens, Pelosis, Reids, Kerrys, Sebeliuses…

The question becomes which way will the morality inversion shift?
Which side of the morality balance will win?
Progressives or Judeo-Christians?

Future Directions

Chariot race in the Circus Maximus, ancient RomeSome conservatives believe that the same form of progressive policy now being exercised by the Obama administration was responsible for the collapse of ancient Rome.  They include some pretty smart people, like Steve Forbes.  Astute parallels between the Roman empire and the United States are pointed out in Are We Rome?

Circus Madison Goes On, a blog post here, made similar analogies between progressive Madison, WI, and Rome’s ancient Circus Maximus, an ancient site famous for chariot races, gladiator fights, Christian slaughter and games, as well as a local marketplace. Very much like Madison, where Capitol Square hosts bicycle and track races, farmer’s markets, and even quite a few “lynchings” of those who are conservative or religious.  This has included the harassment of Bishop Morlino by gay demonstrators, the Madison Teacher protests during which conservative senators were chased by crowds around the Capitol building, and the hanging of a baloon effigy of Justice Prosser. 

Mercifully, many conservatives, including myself and Steve Forbes, are optimistic about the fact that Americans are now more aware and more involved, and we believe that the degeneration of American values can still be turned around.  Steve Forbes claims that awareness and involvement, and movements like the tea party may prevent us from collapsing like Rome. I am Slide18-e1376614703643convinced that the morality inversion can be reversed and a return to Godliness can prevent us from collapsing as Rome did.

Whether we succeed in correcting previous errors and thus recover from a temporary derailment, or whether the civilization built in the United States collapses like that of Rome, is in our hands and in the hands of God.
Let’s not forget our most powerful ally. Religion is power.

Related Articles:

Political Puzzle Pieces Falling Into Place

 

Instilling Virtue in Future World Leaders…

What an Opportunity!

Just last week, my husband and I had a chance to visit our old “stomping grounds” in Princeton, New Jersey, where he was invited to give a lecture.  While there, we chanced across another incredible lecture by a Princeton alumnus, Steve Forbes, entitled Why the Tax and Monetary Sins of the West Now Threaten Civilization.  Just had to share that lecture, and a bit about the incredible people behind it!  (for audio and summary, scroll down below)

DSCN4875

In the photo (left to right), I am pictured after the lecture with Steve Forbes, and with Robert P. George.  These are two very remarkable men, who are making great strides toward instilling virtue in our next generation of intellectuals.

Steve Forbes

The speaker, Malcolm Stevenson “Steve” Forbes, is an ardent pro-life supporter, and knows the value of a higher moral standard in society.  He also advocates common-sense fiscal policies which he distills from his study of history (both recent and not-so-recent), as well as from his family’s capacity as financial experts and journalists for over a century.  Steve campaigned for Republican nomination to the presidency twice, in 1996 and in 2000.  His views, more liberal in the first election, shifted toward conservatism, and in 2000 he opposed abortion and supported prayer in public schools.

While on the Board of Trustees of Princeton University, Steve’s alma mater (’70), Steve Forbes issued a statement in 1999, withdrawing his donations from Princeton University due to its hiring of philospher Peter Singer, who advocates infanticide and views personhood as being limited to ‘sentient’ beings.  Singer, despite his exclusion of some disabled people and of infants from personhood, was appointed by Princeton University to a place of honor in an endowed chair of bioethics.  Steve Forbes sent a letter withdrawing financial backing from Princeton, stating that “Peter Singer is part of what the Pope rightly calls the “culture of death.”

Shortly after Singer’s appointment, Steve Forbes left the Princeton Board of Trustees, after 10 years of service.  In 2000, he co-founded the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton, which today offers students high caliber lectures almost weekly, in association with Princeton’s Department of Politics.

 Robert P. George

Robert_George Steve was introduced by Robert P. George, the Director of the Princeton University James Madison Program.  (More information on the James Madison Program after the lecture summary and audio.)  Professor George is McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, and has been called America’s “most influential conservative Christian thinker”.
.
George drafted the Manhattan Declaration, a manifesto signed by Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical leaders that “promised resistance to the point of civil disobedience against any legislation that might implicate their churches or charities in abortion, embryo-destructive research or same-sex marriage.”

This manifesto has been signed by over half a million people, including about 250 prominent US religious leaders from all faiths, and including 55 Roman Catholic Bishops.  For my Madison friends,  Madison’s Bishop Morlino was among the first to sign the Manhattan Declaration.  I have signed it as well.

I could go on about the seemingly endless credentials of these two men, but let’s get to the lecture.  Suffice it to say that I stand in awe of both them, and I pray that efforts like theirs will begin to balance the liberal propaganda offered at most Universities under the guise of education, so that our young people, whose minds and consciences are being formed at Universities, get to hear virtuous alternatives and arguments.

The Lecture

The lecture took place at Princeton University,  in McCosh Hall at 4:30PM, on March 10th, 2013.
.Audio:
Why the Tax and Monetary Sins of the West Now Threaten Civilization:

audio

Steve Forbes at Princeton 3-10-13  

DSCN4899
Princeton Chapel and McCosh Hall

 

Summary of Steve Forbes’ lecture:

Steve Forbes’ talk, in conjunction with the title, and with the historical analysis he provided, implied that irresponsible policies such as abandoning the gold standard and excessive taxation not only caused the Great Depression, which could have been averted, but may threaten our present civilization, although there is still adequate time for correction.

644230_574350245908577_605734892_n Introduction by Robert P. George, Director of the Princeton University James
Madison Program –
Steve Forbes is one of the co-founders of the James Madison Program in
American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.
He is widely known as Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of

Forbes Media, which was founded by Steve’s grandfather (Bertie Charles Forbes, born in Scotland, 1880). Forbes is the nation’s leading business magazine with a circulation of over
900,000. Each issue’s “Fact and Comment” editorial is written by Steve, and he is widely recognized as a financial journalist whose economic forecasts have proved most accurate.

Steve has served on a variety of influential commissions, including heading President Reagan’s bi-partisan Board for International Broadcasting. He oversaw Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, which have been acknowledged to have helped President Reagan in his efforts to dismantle the iron curtain.

Steve campaigned twice (1996 and 2000) for the Republican nomination for the presidency.
He currently serves on several Foundations, including the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Steve received the BA degree from Princeton in 1970, and he served as a
member of the board of trustees of Princeton University for 10 years.

 

Steve Forbes speaks (summary):

This is a talk about America’s founding and America’s future.
The US plays unique role in the world – it has been the guarantor of peace
and stability in the world.
Recall what happened in the 1930s when there was no such power in the world.
The security umbrella provided by the US has prevented world wars from
developing since the 1940s.
 DSCN4849

In the 1970s, a weak US government with weak policies lead to a perceived decline, and world instability grew.
A strengthened government with changes in policy in the 1980s caused democracy to spread world-wide.

The US instituted massive tax cuts, rebuilt its economy and military strength, creativity rose, and the Berlin wall fell.
From the early 1980s to 2007 the world went through an amazing period of growth where never before had so many people enjoyed such economic growth – millions joined the middle class in countries like India, China and Africa.

So what went wrong?
France, Germany, Japan are in recession – massive spending is hurting China.

Crises are seen in North Korea and the Middle East.
Iran’s buildup of nuclear weapons is threatening Israel.
The US has moved military assets to that part of the world to keep oil flowing.
Extremist groups are active, China has massive military buildup, Vietnam is begging the US for help.
All of this is happening because the US is seen as being in decline.
The US’s financial crisis is seen as evidence of a fundamental flaw in free-market capitalism.

Where do we go from here?
The situation we have today is the result of fundamental policy errors in money and taxes, like those of the 1930 and 1970s.
These errors are errors in Monetary Policy and Taxes/Trade – topics that are so boring that the Federal Reserve has no oversight by Congress!
Monetary policy is an intimidating subject.

The Central Bank must supply the right amount of money to prevent stalling or flooding the economic engine.
Our Central Bank has been printing too much money.
They do not understand that money or currency is just a means to facilitate trade.
Distortions occur when the Fed does not understand that wealth is created by you – not by money.

Slide1

For this to work, money must have a fixed value, like time or length.
If the number of hours in a day does not have a fixed value, how would you know how to pay someone’s hourly rate?
With variable value of money, investment in a more productive future is discouraged, and instead money goes into hard assets to preserve what you have.
In the 1970s oil went from $3 to $40 per barrel.
When inflation was stopped by Reagan, oil went down to $20 where it stayed for 20 years.

You know there are problems when people start talking about investing in gold.
Why would people want to invest in gold?
Faulty government policies create mistrust in the value of currency.
Money is not being invested the way it should in building businesses for the future.
If you don’t know whether your investment will pay back an amount in today’s dollars, or in some lesser amount, you do not take the risk.

If the hour was suddenly made 50 minutes by government policy, how would you decide what to pay the hourly worker? Inflation undermines investments, wages stagnate, and social trust is undermined. This demoralizes society by creating arbitrarily winners and losers.

Windfall gains by some lead to unstable commodities.  Others lose since they cannot get loans to build businesses.
Effort and reward are severed, and speculation seems an easier way to get ahead than productive effort.
Lenin once noted that “the best way is to undermine the social order is to debauch the currency”!
If we do not have stable money, you get protectionism.

Slide1

So what will happen?
I believe that the dollar will be realigned with G-O-L-D, which guarantees a fixed value of money.
The market should determine the value of money, not Washington.
Gold is the one thing we have that keeps its intrinsic value.
Fixing the mile at 5,280 feet, does not mean that you cannot build more highway.
Similarly, gold just fixes the value of money – it sets the standard.
This worked for 180 years – and gave us a stable value of money.

The other error made by government concerns Taxes and Trade.
Taxes are not just a means to raise revenue for government – taxes are the price you have to pay to take risks on your investments.
Therefore it is easy to see that lowering taxes encourages people to do more.
Raise the price of something, you get less, lower the price you get more – it is just that simple!

For the first time since the 1930s we have countries increasing taxes instead of lowering them in the face of declining economies.
This is in spite of plenty of evidence that raising taxes deepens the decline.
Greece is in a depression – yet it is raising taxes, Italy is stagnant – but it is raising taxes.
Portugal, Spain, France are wondering why people are leaving their countries.
Japan raised its taxes and is going nowhere.

Is there hope? Yes!
In the Baltic states and Sweden, where they have not raised taxes, people are doing well.
In the US, states without income taxes do much better than those that do.
Illinois, California, Connecticut, Maryland are going in the the same direction as Greece.
The good news is that people do eventually learn from their mistakes.

Slide1

Structural changes are needed so that economies can come back.
Put another way, Lincoln’s Gettysburg address is only 272 words, the Declaration of Independence: 1,300 words, the US Constitution and amendments: 7,200 words, the Bible: 773,000 words, and the US Tax code is 9,000,000 words and running!
Nobody knows what is in it!
But consensus is emerging to revamp the tax code.
This includes cutting taxes and eliminating death taxes (i.e., no taxation without respiration!)
The US population spends $6.5B per year on preparing taxes.
This money can be put to much better use!

Signs of change are being seen.
Once the US starts to get it right, other countries will follow.
The Great Depression was the result of massive government error that started with the US government raising taxes and tariff out of ignorance.
In 1930 they decide to raise taxes on imports.
Other countries retaliated by raising taxes, and this destroyed the global trading system, and led to the depression.
Stable exchange rates and removal of trade barriers are simple measures that history has shown lead to success.

These changes will recreate the momentum we had before 2007, where everyone in the world will have, as Lincoln put it, “a chance to improve their lot in life” again.

 -End of Steve Forbes Talk Summary

 

 

madison1

The James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions

The James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions was founded in 2000 by the Department of Politics at Princeton University and “is dedicated to exploring fundamental and enduring questions of political thought and constitutional law.  It promotes greater appreciation of Western tradition of legal and political thought, and supports the application of fundamental principles to modern social problems, particularly as they are manifested in the domain of public law.  By supporting the study of foundational issues, the Program seeks to fulfill its mandate of offering civic education of the highest possible caliber.”

The James Madison Program at Princeton also supports the James Madison Society, which is an international community of scholars whose research contributes to civic education in institutions of higher learning.  Members of the Society share the belief of James Madison that only a well-instructed people can be permanently free.  They also share a commitment to instill within rising generations an appreciation of the common good and the moral foundations of democratic governance. The Society provides a forum through which scholars who have demonstrated a commitment to excellence in constitutional law, political thought, and related fields, can engage in intensive discussions about their research and teaching.

 Expansion Needed!

After listening to Steve’s lecture audio above, or reading the summary of it, it is clear that the James Madison Program should expand its reach to as many universities as possible, so as to instill reasoned values of virtue and common-sense
in our students, the future leaders of our society.

The James Madison Program website offers opportunities for audio and video of previous talks, schedules of future talks, email notification of events, and opportunities to contribute to this crucial program, which specailizes in instilling values in the future leaders of America.

All Posts