Guest column: Matt Winey: America at a crossroads



Matt Winey

Coming soon:

Look for Matt Winey’s column, along with a feature story about the evolution of the local tea party, in the next Moffat Monthly, which can be found inside Friday’s Craig Daily Press. The upcoming M2 will also feature inside stories on Moffat County High School spring sports teams, along with a feature from the community about a prominent local family preparing to say goodbye.

Would the Founding Fathers recognize today’s U.S. government? Would those who lived in the 13 states that ratified the U.S. Constitution?

I’ve become a better student of American history since the 2008 national elections than I was during my high school years, and my answer to these questions is a resounding NO.

To explain my answer, I think it’s necessary to see what the American mind was like that caused us to declare our independence from the British, fight the Revolutionary War, and come up with the form of government they did.

The form of government they came up with had to support the words and statements that were contained in the Declaration of Independence.

I believe, as you study the grievances Americans of that time period had against the British, you will see a British government similar in many ways to the government we have now. Our Founding Fathers opposed this form of government so vehemently they were willing to lose life and property and go to war against it.

Here are a few grievances from the Declaration of Independence and perhaps their modern day equivalents:

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. (Arizona immigration laws)

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. (Obama Care)

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. (Agenda 21 and the Environmental Protection Agency)

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. (Czars)

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended Legislation. (United Nations)

For imposing taxes on us without our consent. (When more paper money is printed, the value of each dollar goes down, in effect the same as a tax to pay our enormous national debt.)

Thankfully, times are different from when America went to war against the British.

We indeed have the right to vote given to us by our Founding Fathers.

But, I believe our country is at a crossroads.

Are we going to try and gain back the form of government the Founding Fathers created, or will we keep progressing into a form of slavery that was detested by them?

Matt Winey is a member of the Bears Ears Tea Party Patriots. He can be reached at


leroymcgee 5 years, 1 month ago

Thanks Daily Press for adding a new comedy piece to the opinion pages. This is hilarious!

America may be at a crossroads, but if Mr. Whiney and his fear-mongering conspiracy-theorists at the Tea Baggers Party were in control America wouldn't take either path, they'd just turn around and go backwards.


Andrew Russo 5 years, 1 month ago

("We indeed have the right to vote given to us by our Founding Fathers.")

The Constitution of the United States is the law of the land, not the Declaration of Independence. There is no affirmative "right to vote" in the Constitution just as "The Constitution doesn’t say every individual in the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn’t say that." As was pointed out by former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

States give you the "right to vote" and state laws are always superseded by federal law and the U.S. Constitution. Seems we are merely given the privilege to vote like we are given the privilege to drive a vehicle. A favor.

There is absolutely no mention of political parties or a two party, winner take all system anywhere in the Constitution yet two political parties rule this government at both federal and state levels. Two totally corrupt political parties offering up incompetent, bought and paid for politicians for us to choose from. We only have the privilege of voting for or against the governor and state and federal congresspeople in our district and state with a slight chance that they haven't been compromised, yet.

For president, we have electors, installed by those same two political parties, to choose the lesser of two evils. In all but two states, candidate A can receive 49% of the popular vote, Candidate B 51% and candidate B will receive ALL electoral votes. If third party votes are included, a candidate could receive less than 50%, less than 40% of the popular vote and be given ALL the electoral votes. One thing that IS in the Constitution is the fact that we don't vote for the president. Electors do. That's how our Founding Fathers set it up.


Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.