You want to know what the biggest concern of our founding fathers was?
It wasn't taxes, the right to own guns, or open democracy vs. constitutional monarchy.
It was the presence of a standing army amidst their homes and families.
Consider these quotes from George Mason and James Madison during a debate at the Constitutional Convention, where they disagreed wildly on the power of the federal government and the procedures of the militia, but both agreed how horrid a standing army is.
Mason: No man has a greater regard for the military gentlemen than I have. I admire their intrepidity, perseverance, and valor. But when once a standing army is established in any country, the people lose their liberty. When, against a regular and disciplined army, yeomanry are the only defence,--yeomanry, unskilful and unarmed,--what chance is there for preserving freedom? Give me leave to recur to the page of history, to warn you of your present danger. Recollect the history of most nations of the world. What havoc, desolation, and destruction, have been perpetrated by standing armies!
Madison: Mr. Chairman, I most cordially agree, with the honorable member last up, that a standing army is one of the greatest mischiefs that can possibly happen. It is a great recommendation for this system, that it provides against this evil more than any other system known to us, and, particularly, more than the old system of confederation. The most effectual way to guard against a standing army, is to render it unnecessary. The most effectual way to render it unnecessary, is to give the general government full power to call forth the militia, and exert the whole natural strength of the Union, when necessary.
Within this small window of a single debate, we see the argument for why the National Guard came to be (beginning with the Militia Acts of 1792).
But what happens when the modern National Guard isn't our only military and we have a permanent standing army more powerful than anything in world history?
Indulge me with another short history lesson before we get to DeSantis and the clown-world media response.
Did you know that awhile after the Battle of Yorktown, the majority of the officers in the Continental Army were so fed up with Congress' inability to pay them that they considered a coup?
They literally met to decide on the measure, but George Washington showed up by surprise and BARELY talked them out of it. The officers were so angry that Washington's wisdom didn't get through to them. Instead, it was only when he took out his new glasses so that he could read a letter that his soldiers felt a pang of brotherhood and sense of awe at the sacrifice Washington had made for his country.
Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown grey, but almost blind, in the service of my country.
One of the officers at the meeting, Captain Samuel Shaw, had this to say:
There was something so natural, so unaffected, in this appeal, as it rendered it superior to the most studied oratory; it forced its way to the heart, and you might see sensibility moisten every eye.
Washington knew the danger of a standing army.
So did every other founding father, whether they were for strong centralized government or against it.
Give our massive military industrial complex today, its increasingly ideological focus, and its use as a tool by the government to guard against its own citizens (does fencing around the Capitol or Gen. Milley talking about "white rage" sound familiar?), our founding fathers would be turning over in their graves.
Which makes this a common-sense measures to preserve liberty and the sovereign rights of the States:
You wouldn't know it from that headline though.
CNN was the same.
They want you to think DeSantis is out there trying to amp up a paramilitary force to go all blitzkrieg on Washington. They want you to believe he is the bad guy here.
Let's let DeSantis speak for himself:
This makes a heck of a lot of sense.
Not only does it guard against the rampant increase in federal tyranny, but it gives extra help to existing infrastructure to respond in emergencies.
I would much rather have something like this than the fractured boogaloo boi groups that are currently running around waiting for Civil War 2.0 to drop.
(Don't get too salty, you boogaloo bois: I'm not degrading the need for an independent militia of private citizens.)
Let's revisit the Second Amendment for a hot sec, shall we?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The Founders tied the right to self-defense to the necessity of a militia – and the purpose of a militia was to provide a check and defense against any federal army that might be used against the people.
More from The Hill:
DeSantis said the proposed unit would "not be encumbered by the federal government," adding that this force would give him "the flexibility and the ability needed to respond to events in our state in the most effective way possible."
DeSantis is asking for $3.5 million from the state legislature to establish the unit.
If established, Florida will become the 23rd active state guard in the country.
The idea was part of DeSantis's larger military budget proposal, which included establishing three new armories, a new National Guard Headquarters and supporting service members getting degrees.
The only reason this was in the news is because the Left wants to paint DeSantis as an extremist warlord who wants to create his own banana republic on the mass graves of 'Rona victims (Florida currently has the lowest Covid case rate in the nation btw).
