Of course, in this instance, the various militia groups had been forewarned that the British were planning such a move on the American arsenal, and planned counter measures for days. Now name any other revolutionary battle where such organfization existed.
Even after Valley Forge, American soldiers marched hungry, threadbare and shoeless. Ammunition was almost always scarce; rarely, if ever, could the Continentals consider fighting for more than a day in any encounter. Trenton, Saratoga, even the seige at Yorktown were all ad hoc encounters to take advantage of flawed dispositions by the British. Even then, things never went as planned.

“So they did have manpower, just not a lot of it.”

Where manpower is needed is at the point of contact with the enemy. Only twice were the Continentals able to outnumber the British. At Saratoga, Burgoyne’s army depleted through illness and attrition, while Gates gathered recruits and reinforcements from Washington. At Yorktown, Greene and Washington combined their armies to trap Cornwallis. Even then, they needed French naval assistance to prevent British reinforcment from the sea.

“Did you know that the US Army considers Valley Forge critical to the creation of the modern US Army?”

Sure. It should be a lesson for any one: “How not to run an army”. We were just discussing D-Day. Much of it’s success were the disasters of Dieppe and Anzio, and the lessons learned afterward. People learn from other peoples’ mistakes.

The point is, we look back on their success and bestow an almost superhuman quality to the founding fathers, when in fact most of the time they were reacting, sometimes terribly, to circumstances beyond their control. And the outcome was still in doubt up to Yorktown. The British threw in the towel.

“They had the will to win.”

I hope Republicans do, too. Because it’s an uphill battle all the way.

I think they had more on the ball that you give them credit for, and the British were not as incompetent as you may be portraying.

Research each of the Founding Fathers, and you’ll find they were deeply involved in various movements many years before the first shot was fired.

Of course they didn’t have a complete overall strategy, as nobody had ever done what they were in the process of doing and were having to figure it out as they went – but they were developing strategy over those years.

Regarding organization, just consider what happened at Lexington and Concord. Militia – organized and numerous – fought the British troops under the direction of their officers.

You mentioned Valley Forge. Did you know that the US Army considers Valley Forge critical to the creation of the modern US Army? It was at Valley Forge that Washington’s army actually WAS organized with the help of individuals such as Lafeyette.

Regarding manpower, only about 1/3 of the population was behind the independence movement, and of that 1/3 you have to remember that not every single one would be a soldier. You’d have wives and children and elderly also supporting the movement, but not really useful in a combat role.

So they did have manpower, just not a lot of it.

But you did hit on an important component of their victory, perhaps more important than the rest.

They had the will to win.

Sometimes, that’s enough when you have little of anything else.

Actually, about all the founders had was will, and a vision. Ask the soldiers at Valley Forge about organization. Ask Washington about his continual lack of manpower. Ask the Continental Congress about the ever changing strategy. Our independence is greatly due to the British being more incompetent than us at the time, and luck ( providence? ).

http://www.amazon.com/Almost-Miracle-American-Victory-Independence/dp/0195181212

To regain power, we will need those things mentioned above. We will not be able to rely on our opponents’ incompetence.

I can in large part agree with your views in the immediately preceeding post, with the exception of Giuliani.

I wouldn’t want him anywhere near the Oval Office.

Being a Southerner myself, I have no problem with Gingrich being Catholic as long as he doesn’t place the Pope’s directives above those of the US Constitution and the people. In the modern era, I don’t honestly think that’s a major issue anymore.

I actually think a Palin/Gingrich ticket would be a powerful force.

My understanding is Gingrich is something of a free thinker, politically speaking, and is good at the big idea thing but terrible at implementation and drove his republican collegues crazy when he was Speaker.

Palin, on the other hand, seems to be a solid executive, knows how to make things work, and seems more of a “Salt of the Earth” kind of person.

What little she may not have experience in, Gingrich can be a close advisor for, and I think she will always remember who she is and who put her in office.

Jindal I think is a good man, but I have a suspicion his personality could get overwhelmed by the DC establishment.

I am already a member of an organization that is founded for the purpose of Constitutional restoration.

I am also in favor of the flat tax. There are other countries that do it and it works. Years ago I was not in favor of the flat tax, but having since read some very good papers about it I have changed my mind. In fact, it seems to be a habit of mine in recent years – changing my mind.

Am most definitely not in favor of proscribing “the wealthy.” But I am definitely in favor of proscribing certain people whose influence has been very destructive. I would not, however, attack the President, however odious his or her role had been. Most definitely he or she would be removed from office, but I would strongly command that not a hair on his or her head be touched. Others I would not be so solicitous for their safety.

But let us all hope that, beginning in November of 2010, we begin to throw the bums out of office. I might add that there are not a lot of Republicans who I would want re-elected. And for 2012 these are the names I like to run for POTUS: Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Bobby Jindal, and Rudi Giuliani.

I know Newt has his detractors, but he seems to have really changed his life. And sincerely, I might add, although some Southerners will not like the fact that he is a convert to Catholicism. But the man is very bright, knows history, knows law, and seems to have not wavered in his conservatism. Sarah Palin is also very bright. I like her a lot too. All of the people I have suggested are, in terms of depth of knowledge, are way far ahead of BarryO. An emptier suit there never was to hold the office he holds.

While I think you’re a little sanguine about the outcome of a civil war in America, I really like your last post. The schoolroom to inculcate citizenship; the pulpit to strengthen it; and, if I may add, the gallows to maintain quality control.

First, what if the military didn’t stand down? What are the ramifications? It’s always a mistake to assume things.

Second, what happens in any kind of post-civil war era?

Yes, I agree most of the wealthy left will run with their tails between their legs – but there are vast numbers who won’t have the financial wherewithall to do the same.

You can usually find them serving coffee in small coffee shops while looking down their noses at anyone they consider less intellectual than themselves.

Anyway, the point is there was a very good reason the American Revolution and the French Revolution ended up so differently.

Anyone actually wanting a revolution/civil war – and I’m not accusing anyone here of that – should be very careful what they wish for.

Third, yes the Founding Fathers did spend many years laying the groundwork for the American Revolution.

When it came, all othe options had been exhausted. They had made both a legal and a moral case for their cause, denying that high ground to the British. And they had the organization, will, manpower, and strategy to achieve indepedence.

I don’t really see the same thing going on now, except for those who are banking up food and ammo as a “just in case” approach if things start to go really badly.

What I would love to see is some sort of political “Constitutional Restoration” movement begin forcefully pushing the federal government back into the framework under which it was created.

While some call for a flat tax or a repeal of the income tax amendment, I think the same can be accomplished simply by adopting an amendment that specifies exactly what the interstate commerce clause refers to.

It’s known as the clause the ate the Constitution for good reason.

Limit the interstate commerce clause to what clearly IS interstate commerce, and many of the federal government’s activities would have to be severely curtailed as blatant overstepping of bounds.

If the case can be successfully made that the government should NOT be doing a certain activity because it is unsupported by this amendment, then by all means that federal agency should be shut down and there is no reason to spend money on it.

If the money can not be justified to spend on it, then that money can then be deducted from the annual budget – which of course would mean resisting efforts to simply re-allocate it elsewhere.

You can’t rely on the courts to pull back on this subject, as they’ve already spent decades ruling otherwise.

Hell, you can’t even freely grow your own garden for personal food production, as the federal government obtained a ruling that even THAT impacts interstate commerce!

Think about that.

Something as simple and basic as putting a seed in the ground in order to feed your family is subject to federal restrictions.

How crazy is that?

It took decades and layers of court rulings to get to where we are now, and it will take many years to undo the damage.

The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful.

Gibbon, a pillar of the Enlightenment, understood that religion plays an essential function in ordering society, without needing to debate the merits of any particular religion.

As some of you know, I work in the investments business. I have had the good fortune to meet and know some truly fine people. Every now and then I have the misfortune of meeting someone who I think is creepy (even if they hide it well). I can only imagine how such a person treats his or her employees and underlings, let alone other people in their lives. We have arrived at this moment of crisis because enough people have been hurt by some very bad people in their work lives. Taken advantage of and mistreated. I’m not rejecting the profit motive. You cannot have successful companies without a drive to garner sales and earnings. We hope that people do it honestly and with flair and creativity. But it isn’t always that way. However, business failure is a fact of life in our system. It’s actually healthy. However, in order to keep things moving along you have to have an environment in which risk-taking is rewarded. Anyway, I digress. For it all to ultimately work well, we need to be people who, besides being hard-driven achievers, also understand that we have a responsibility to our fellow human beings. Call it enlightened self-interest. Whatever…

As we become more rotten and corrupt human beings we feed the anger and resentment – some of it legit – of people who have been cast off and pushed aside. So, capitalism and our Republic need people who cultivate virtue. Its opposite destroys the body politic and our economy. Then, along come demagogic Marxist hucksters who prey upon people’s misery. This is, in part, what Obonga has done.

I am hoping that if we survive this very difficult period ahead in our nation’s young history that we come out of it with some important lessons learned. I realize what I am about to suggest may not be popular with some people, but it’s inescapable: the pillars of this society are education and religion. You cannot avoid it. If you do things that harm or diminish them, you harm our Republic and our economy.

We can blame Obonga all we want for this developing mess, but ultimately we are to blame for being in this kind of condition where our judgment is so impaired. This is a wake up call to the nation.

But if Obamaism isn’t soundly, undeniably, and legally rejected in the 2010 elections, all bets are off.

In what *&^%$# universe would citizens in a constitutional republic stand by while a partisan organization whose very existence was publicly acknowledged as a vehicle for election fraud was made recipient of hundreds of millions of dollars of public money.

Was then elevated to the status of a defacto government agency.

And then given control of the 2010 census.

This afternoon Ginsburg stayed the Chrysler deal.

It’s a small step, but it may be the first public official standing up for the Constitution.

We can only hope.

We must defeat the Washington culture in 2010. I don’t particularly care which party returns as majority. I just want the incumbents gone. All of them.

I’d rather the system worked, in other words. Our Constitution was crafted by men who feared the failure of citizenship more than any foreign threat. They were absolutely correct. But elections do still matter, at least they do outside of Minnesota, Ohio, Illinois, and sanctuary cities…

… but give the Won two years and give ACORN two hundred million and suddenly and correctly voting may not matter much at all.