A New America

I propose that radical changes need to be made to this country.

We live in a society where;

• The rich have bought the government.  
• The elected have created a ruling class.  
• The natural resources are locked up in ownership and inaccessible to the rest of the people.  
• The "common man" is no longer able to work for themselves and make a living due to excessive and unnecessary government regulation at the behest of the rich.
• A "serf" class is being established that believes it needs to be protected from themselves and basic needs provided for.
• The election process has been corrupted by the "two party" system.
• The mass media has been co-opted by the rich and ruling classes and serves to manipulate the public with mis-information and with-holding facts.
• The government itself is committing crimes that violate it's own laws, the laws of other countries and the Constitution itself with no consequences.
• The rich and ruling classes have been working to limit the abilities of the people at large to defend themselves by denying access to the same weapons that will be used against them when, not if, the government turns on the people.

You cannot legislate morality.  You cannot protect people from themselves.  The very attempt to do so is deny them their most basic right recognized by the U.S. Constitution.  That being the God given right of free will.  Each person MUST be able to live their own life as they see fit.

This includes being able to do what they choose to make a living for themselves.  To be able to hunt, gather and farm responsibly.  The ability to barter and trade among each other fairly as they see fit to meet their needs and wants for themselves and their families.

These conditions are being denied to citizens of the U.S. in these times and the people who are being hurt the most by it are being mis-educated and distracted from realizing it.

Tensions are rising and conflict is growing.  There is talk of impending civil war more and more. 

My fellow citizens of the U.S.A., it is almost too late now.  The time to fight for freedom is not on another country's land but right here at home.  Will you be divided and conquered or will you rise as one free people to set things right before the need for violence arrives?

It was lost a long time ago

From the very first time the government stepped in to do something in the name of protecting us from ourselves, Liberty was lost.

For every time someone proclaims a new law is necessary, even if it only saves one, Liberty is lost.

Every time a new executive order or regulation is put into effect to protect our "interests", Liberty is lost.

Every time one branch of the government wants to do something without input from the other branches, Liberty is lost.

Every time an elected representative proclaims him or herself as a "leader" of this country, Liberty is lost.

Every time a person who is eligible to vote does not, Liberty is lost.

Here are some real facts for you.

This is a democratic republic. 

We, the citizens and voters of this country are the leaders.

We elect representatives to make and enforce laws that reflect the intentions and interests of the citizens.

Those elected are representatives of the people who have selected them to represent the interests of the people. Nothing more, nothing less.

When you don't vote, the politicians assume "leadership".  They see the situation as you have abandoned your position as a leader of this country and they will now speak for you since you will not speak for yourself.

When we do not vote, we give them power.  They will not relinquish power willingly.  Every person must claim the one piece of power they have, their vote.

The electoral college was designed to protect the minority states.  To give those states with lower populations equal footing.  That tool has been corrupted.

As long as the electoral college representatives do not have to agree with the popular vote of their district, the presidential election will continue to be bought and sold by party politicians.

Until it is corrected, Liberty is lost.

Simple Liberty

Liberty, the freedom to make decisions and choices for one's self that are not imposed by a religious, governmental or "other" entity with regulation powers over groups of people.

Simple Liberty is what most people ask for.  You don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you what to do.  Not much difficult to understand there.

Obviously, there are regulations on individuals liberties in every society.  There has to be a compromise in order to protect the remaining liberties.

In America, the "golden rule" of regulating individual liberties is the idea that "Your rights end where the next person's begins."

So, to state, again simplistically, the ideal of American individual liberties we say, "If you don't like/ agree with/ believe in 'A', then you do not have to do/think/agree with, 'A'.  However, you do not have the right to interfere in someone else's ability to do/ think/ agree with 'A'."

If you don't like abortion, don't get one.
If you don't like homosexuality, don't be homosexual.
If you don't like music and dancing, don't listen to music or dance.
If you don't like just about anything, don't do it.

However, this is America.  You have the right to live your own life and no one else's.  Unless someone is doing something that is hurting other people, they have the right to screw their lives up if that is, in fact, what they are doing.

We hove to make note here though, that a great many people want to maintain and vociferously defend the right to live their own life, yet at the same time, when they engage in something that causes them some type of harm, they do not want to accept the responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

In a truly "free" society, it is up to the individuals to research, prepare for and understand the surrounding issues and risks of what they involve themselves in.

Because we now have courtrooms full of lawsuits by people who take litigious action trying to avoid being responsible for their actions, the government and regulatory bodies increasingly abridge individual liberties to protect people from themselves.

The problem with this is that everyone must now lose or have liberties restricted because of others that have abused their own liberties.

The bigger problem with this is that we have a government that thinks it can continue to restrict everyone's liberties in order to protect people from themselves and to protect itself from liability.

The citizens who elect the representatives have voluntarily handed over the leadership  of the country to the government itself.

American leadership is not meant to work that way though.  It is a government intended to be led from within the citizenship, not the government.

In short, we have taken the locks off the pens and hired wolves to tend sheep.

Apathy, desire for comfort and an attitude of "Let someone else worry about it." among a larger number of citizens has led to a governing "class"  that does not sees itself as the stewards of the citizens interests, but as the leaders and "keepers" of the citizens instead.

We are the citizen leaders of this country.  We provide the course and direction of this country, NOT the government.

In order to regain our liberties we are obligated to participate.

1) Be a part of the discussions as often as possible.  It may be boring to sit through a city council meeting, but they are counting on not having many, if any citizens pay attention to what they are attempting to slip by them.

2) Vote.  Vote every chance you get to.  The government and so called partisan "leadership" is counting on voter apathy to slip their candidates through the few citizens who are participating.

3) Be educated in local, state and federal issues, don't just take the media's or the politician's word for it.  The sad thing is, the media is not objective or un-biased.  They have become editorialists and have taken sides in political and governmental activities.  The politicians have become and hired people to be masters of deception.  The more citizens educate themselves, each other and think for themselves, the better and greater impact citizens will make at the polls.

The Death Of Liberty Is ...Selfishness

To have liberty, in this country, the freedom to make choices for oneself instead of having some entity or group forcing them upon you, is something special in the world.  Sadly, too many people confuse liberty with selfishness nowadays.

Civil liberties and the "protection" of them in this country were intended (ah, there we go again with intentions)to make sure that certain things were not denied to people based on things they couldn't necessarily change. Ensuring that things like housing and the ability to go into store and shop, etc for things like skin color, physical or mental handicap.

There are some things "protected that could be chosen to change, but they are those kind of things that if people were forced to change them or were denied a living because of them, we might as well hang up the whole "freedom" ting anyway.  Something like religious beliefs for example. Religion is a choice, but it isn't a light choice.  It's something that affects our lives profoundly.

Fast forward to today.People want to make civil liberty issues out of personal choices to escape responsibility for their personal decisions.  It's not enough that they aren't denied the ability to do most anything they want, no.  Everyone else must be forced to accept and support that choice as well., is what they want.

Part of being free is accepting responsibility for yourself and your choices.  If someone invents something that is deemed largely un-safe or even dangerous to use and a few people make the choice to use it anyway, they have accepted a responsibility for their choice.  To tell everyone else that not only must we accept that they want to use that thing (no problem there as long as it hurts only the person using it if it hurts anyone at all) but that we must accept their using it even when it conflicts with other peoples choices and rights, well now, that's not OK, not at all.

Don't Waste Your Vote, Vote Your Own Mind

How often do we hear people say things like, "If you vote for candidate C, you might as well be voting for candidate A, so vote for candidate B to make sure candidate A doesn't get elected."

Have you ever heard, "We need to vote for the best interest of the whole country."

That sounds nice doesn't it?  Not to me.

I don't try to tell people how to live and work in other parts of the country because I don't know what is in the best interests for their geography, weather, economy and so on.  No, I'll continue to focus on the very few things the federal gov't should be focusing on and my local issues, where I live and am involved.

This country was founded on the ideal of individual liberty.  Each person having the rights and freedom to live their own life.

When we walk into the voting booth, that is one of the most personal and individual things we can do.

We are able to express our own individual opinion on who we think is the best candidate for the job.  Not to make sure another candidate doesn't get elected or  just because a candidate belongs to the same party.

Sadly, the only vote that is wasted is the vote not made.  When we have people who will use false and stolen identities to manipulate voting outcomes, it only helps when everyone who is able to vote for themselves does so.

Voting is more than a privilege, it's one of the few outright obligations we have as Americans.

So, This Liberty "Thang"

There is a balance that must be kept between individual liberty and the community as a whole when we live in a town or city.

The problem seems to be that in these times, in name of "safety", in the response to fear, the balance is tipping away from individual liberty.

This is an extremely bad thing.  The rallying cry of the "group" always seems to come down to "If it saves just one..., Then it will be worth it."   That kind of thinking my friends is dangerous and un-true.

Now, I am a notorious isolationist and under other circumstances,  I might relish tossing the many to save the one, but even I realize that all communities start with families.

So balance must be sought.  A tightrope walk that never ends.  We must always ensure the individual has the largest amount of liberty as possible.  At the same time, those individual liberties end where the next person's begins.

As I said in the previous post though, group-thinking seeks to remove individual liberty in the name of safety and security.  Group-thinking is an agent of fear.

More than that though, group-thinking is an agent of control.  Our government was originally designed to make sure the many were above the few.  That small groups of "special people" would not have dominion over the many.

Because this is not a country of many people united as a group of minions or ants in an ant hill.

We are united as individuals with a common cause.  That is in our Constitution.  We are recognized as equal individuals first and foremost.  We cannot or should not, be making laws and regulations that does not take the concern of each individual into consideration.

We should elect representatives to stand for us to do the best job of looking out for the interests of ALL the people in that representative's district.  They should not be looking out for only the interests of the members of his or her party or "club".  Yet it happens more and more each election.

There are people who want to raise taxes  to use taxation as a tool to stop hurting themselves.  That is not what taxation is meant for.  It is not that group of people's place to stop the individual from doing something that might hurt themself.  That is the right, choice, responsibility and consequence of the individual.

You know what else is in our Constitution?  The direction to protect the minorities.  What minorities are those?  Most people think that it is a religious, racial, etc.. minority.

What it really refers to is the voting minority.  The group of people who held the smaller number of the vote.  Now, that might come down to religious, racial or other reasons that numbers in the election were so small, they just weren't there to represent a larger share.  

Our Constitution says that even if one side has the majority (vote) they can't just run roughshod over the minority.  Considerations have to be made to respect those people's individual liberties as well.

That consideration is being lost.  The Constitution is being ignored by the group-thinkers pushed by fear and greed and desire to control.

If we really want to get this country back on track, we have to find balance again and allow people to make their own choices and live with the consequences of them.

Give me liberty or get me the hell out of here.

Personally,  I think the single-most largest loss in the culture wars of America is the concept of Liberty.

Liberty, boiled down to a nut, is being able to live your life without being micro-manged by an "Establishment" entity.  "Establishment" referring to any governmental, religious, trade or other group.

The concept of Liberty, however improperly applied by those "forefathers at the time, is what America is based on.  It's still one of the greatest draws of immigrants from all over the world.

The idea that you can be the person you want to be.  That your life is your own and no group can dictate or pre-determine your life.

Part of the loss of Liberty is the refusal of people to accept the consequences of their choices and decisions.  to take responsibility for the decisions they make and expecting someone else to pay or face some or all of those consequences.

That unwillingness to accept that responsibility incurs a reaction by those groups and entities to claim that if people will expect responsibility for other individuals consequences is going to happen, then those groups will impose regulations to limit their exposure to claims.

If we want Liberty.  if we truly want to keep Liberty in this country, then we must stop expecting it to be a nerf society that protects us from our selves.  

We need to accept the consequences for our actions and decisions without calling for help from Big Brother because life has become too uncomfortable.

Liberty means being able to live our own lives and taking what comes with that.  you can't have it both ways.

Without individual Liberty, there is no America.

So what if they run as an "Independent"?

I've noticed some talk about a few candidates running as Independent and many people hailing them as if they were new saviors.

I would like to say that it's good that they buck the two party system and that they are walking their own line, not the line of a party affiliation.  Very good indeed.

Having said that, just because someone is running as an "Independent" does not mean they don't still have leanings toward party thinking.  Some former democrats and republicans, disillusioned with not getting any traction in their party of choice, are known to run as "Independent" to get some attention.  It doesn't change their political leanings though.

Don't vote for someone just because they run as "Independent".  You want to vote for someone because you agree with their platform and ideas.  Learn what their positions are.

Describing themselves as "Independent"  isn't the only step that needs to be taken to break the chokehold the two party system has on our election system.

Public Libraries are one of Americas's greatest promises fulfilled

Here's what I think of public libraries....

The public library system is fundamental in realizing the potential of the U.S. Constitution.

It is the investment of the community toward ensuring that all the people have the opportunity to express and educate themselves on their own terms and time frames.

It provides a place in which all published material can be presented, especially that information pertaining to self government.  The government itself is placing the power  and potential of the government in the hands of citizens by having a place to disseminate information it creates as a part of it's obligation to report on it's activities and inform the people at large of the laws.

To be able to educate oneself on what topics a person chooses, at their own instigation and intent is perhaps one of the greatest freedoms in the world.  To do so regardless of class, race, gender, etc.. is something that is not known to people in all places around the world.  It is realized at perhaps it's fullest potential here in the United States.

Public libraries are a place people can change their lives, improve their abilities and increase their knowledge as they choose to.  

Unlike public schools which have become more or less centers of indoctrination and nanny oversight, public libraries allow the person to discover and learn from multiple sources and authors.

I believe supporting our public library system is not just a social nicety, but a necessity.  It is incumbent to us to make sure that public resources and funding to public libraries are not cut  or eliminated but always maintained fully.

I support the public libraries system here as one of the basic needs of a self governed people and land where people are not just free to learn and improve their lives, but are encouraged to do so.

I hope you do to.

Taxes = Dues

What are taxes anyway?  People always talk about how we "owe" taxes to the government.

To use the word "owe" though implies that the government has provided a product or service that we must pay them back for.  In truth, the government does no such thing.

At it's most basic, the government is a big club.  It's those of us who want to live and work together with something special, something different in mind.

Let's call it the "America Club".

Some folks got together and made a group that let people be themselves.  No one tells each other what to be, how to live their lives, etc...  Kind of like creating a hippy commune without the hippies, let's call it a "colony".

This America Club creates some basic membership rules and sets up some guidelines for making sure everything gets done and rules are followed, etc...

In order to make sure that the members interests are served, they hire some folks  to keep things running.  Answer phones, take messages, In other words, employees of the members to handle the business of the association.

So then the members decided they want certain things to happen and certain rules enforced and have some things built for the use of the members.  If they wanted to have all this stuff done though, everyone was going to have to start paying membership dues.

The America Club staff would take those membership dues and pay themselves a salary determined by the club members, a Board of Officers was created to oversee the work of the staff.  They also would use those membership dues to make those things happen the members said they wanted to happen.

We call those membership dues "taxes".

It's more a matter of , if you're going to be a club member, every member has to pay their annual dues.

If you are late on paying your dues, or you don't have the money to pay your dues, things can be worked out, but if we want to keep all those things members wanted built or services put in place, then all the members need to pay their membership dues.

Now, the America Club started out as a "everybody come on down" kind of club, then moved into a "by invitation only" club.  The longer the club has gone on, we saw members having kids and being made "members for life" right off the bat.

We told the kids they would fit in under their parents membership until they were old enough to work, then they had to pay their own membership dues.

It's still an "invitation only" club but there have been lot's of kids born and times have been tough, making it hard for all these members to pay their dues on time, if at all.

There are problems with the system and how late and unpaid dues are handled to be sure.  Overall though, people still like being  in the club.  Membership has it's privileges after all.

We  have issues with who gets to be on the board.  Who has influence, etc...

One important thing to remember is that the staff works for the whole club, all the members, not just the officers or those who make the biggest donations.  The membership dues are owed by all.

Taxes are not "owed" because the government is doing us a service or providing us a product.  They are not doing something out of the kindness of their heart.  They are doing what they are told to do and the money they use to do those things is not their money, it is the members money.

Breaking down what America "Is"

The U.S. Constitution provides rights and freedoms to every individual American citizen.

The powers of the Federal government must be articulated and are limited to what is articulated.  If something is not articulated, it falls to the jurisdiction of the states and the legal citizen voters of those states.

Government prime purpose for existence is to ensure that Constitutional rights and freedoms are protected for every individual.  They are also charged with maintaining a Navy and defending the nation.

Many people are like me, we expect the government to step back and do it's specific jobs and stay out of the way of citizen's everyday lives.  We expect the government to work to ensure a "fair" playing field when some individuals endeavor to take unfair advantage of a situation at the expense of other citizen's rights.

We do not appreciate the government attempting to do things the private sector is supposed to do.  In point of fact, we expect the gov't do contract most work that needs to be done to the private sector.  This means we do not intend for the federal gov't to be manager, contractor and labor force all at the same time.

We expect the federal gov't to respect and defend individuals rights and to recognize the difference between a person and an entity. A corporation is an entity thus should not be given the same rights and freedoms of an actual person.

We expect elected representatives to be beholden first, foremost and only to the people of their respective state or district.  We re-iterate, corporations are entities, NOT people.

The Supreme Court Has Let Us Down

So many people are asking where it is written that makes Obamacare un-Constitutional.  The Supreme Court made it so with their decision to allow spending money by political donors to be considered a freedom of expression.

Citizens have been known since the start of the U.S. to be "voting with their pocketbooks" when they choose to make a purchase or not make a purchase.  It is part of our freedom of speech to not purchase something we do not believe in just as it is to purchase what and from where or who we do have faith or trust in.

Also, keep in mind that it also violates our basic concept of liberty.  You know liberty, as in "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

You do not have liberty when the government is able to force you to make purchases you might not otherwise have made.

 I agree with Justices Scalia, Alito, Kennedy and Thomas, that it is wholly un-Constitutional and should have been tossed out in it's entirety.

The partisan politics that divides the Supreme Court is as damaging to their decisions as partisan politics is to the Congress.

Rest In Peace Constitution, partisan politics has buried thee today.

An Open Letter To "Reverse-ists"

This is my open letter to all those who try to use emotional manipulation and and bullying in order to force through your idea and/or shut down other people's ideas without civil, rational discussion.

Don't know what I mean?  The folks who make comments like" You don't like Obama because your a racist!"  Or the people who shout "If you don't support ay people, you're an obvious hater!"

These kinds of comments are complete falsehoods and emotionally laden.  They use racism and "hate" by identifying anyone who disagrees as someone who is one of those things.

Let me fill you all in on something.  The U.S. Constitution does not say that everyone MUST agree on everything.  If you think people being homosexual is OK, that's fine, it's your opinion and you can have it.  If someone disagrees for whatever reason, legally, by their own Constitutional right, they can believe the total opposite or any difference in between.

As stated before in a post here, your right to an opinion does not mean the rest of the country must agree with and support it.

Just because someone thinks that homosexuality is odd or different or something they do not support does not automatically mean they "hate" anyone.  It means they disagree as is their Constitutional right to do so.

If someone does not agree with a politicians policies and directions, it does not automatically mean they are a racist if that politician is not the same race as them.  It means they disagree with that politician as is their Constitutional right to do so.

Appeasement To The "Entitled" Doesn't Work

People come together to form organizations all the time.

They form clubs, countries, religious bodies, schools, and much more.

It's wired into people to come together and "circle the wagons, so to speak.

Let's say we create a group that exists to represent a group of people's religious ideals.

Let's further say that some schools out there find out we offer money to help schools keep their doors open who meet our requirements of being a pillar of that religious view.

For now, let's keep it basic.  The school wants our religious group's money and support since we have a lot of people with students to recruit from.  in order to get and keep the money, we have a few things that the school needs to agree to.

If the school agrees to the rules to be affiliated with our group, hence eligible to get our money and backing, then all is good.

Say the school starts doing things that are skirting the ideals an values they agreed to hold to.  They made an agreement, if they start playing games and trying to not abide by that agreement, they are in breach of contract at the very least and have shown themselves to be untrustworthy and not the sort of people we want representing our group at the worst.

Now, maybe the people in the school complain that they think our requirements are too stringent.  They think we should change our group.  The school didn't have any problem taking our money though.  They had no problem sending recruitment letters to our members kids, did they?

No, just like many people nowadays, they want to have things both ways.  They don't think they should be held to agreements they made just so they can try to recruit and appeal to other groups of people.


I say, go ahead.  If you want to appeal to those other groups which takes you to doing things that you know violate the agreement you made with our group, then by all means, dissolve the agreement, return the money we gave you and go on with your plan.

You will lose our backing and any gains by association with our group, but you made the choice and now you have to accept the consequences of that choice.

It's the same problem no matter what the group is.  Religious, governmental, social, etc...   People today do not want to accept the consequences of their decisions and want to force everyone else to change to meet their wants.

Many groups have moved into trying to appease this growing number of people who want the world to cater to them.  The people who believe they are entitled somehow to getting anything they want without having to make any change on their own part.  This is appeasement.  It doesn't work because the more these people get their way, the more the expect to get their way.

Some people say that the most simple way to look at the term "conservative" is to say that it is doing things, "by the book".

This means, if you signed an agreement, you are bound to it as  it is written.  People expect you to follow that agreement based on what is actually written in it, rather than just whatever you feel like doing.

Do you think the agreement needs to be re-written or changed?  Then man up and talk to the group face to face and see what they say.  Don't play stupid games or act like petulant children and just go violate the terms of the agreement just because you don't like it anymore.

We make choices every day.  Choices have consequences.  People today don't want to accept the consequences of their choices.  They want someone else to accommodate them so that they don't have to own those consequences.

Then they wonder why the country is so messed up.  What with all the people running around not being responsible for themselves and running away from the consequences of their decisions.

Obamacare is worse than un-constitutional

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

 Those words above aren't from the U.S. Constitution.  They are from the Declaration of Independence. Pay attention to one word in particular, "Liberty".

This country is literally founded on the understanding that people have a god given right to liberty.  How many people know what liberty even means anymore?

Noun:

1. The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life.
2. An instance of this; a right or privilege, esp. a statutory one.

See the first reference in the definition?  That's important because "Obamacare" directly stomps on an individuals freedom from an oppressive restriction imposed by authority.

That's the point in my saying that this goes deeper than constitutionality.  "Obamacare" is an affront to the founding of this country.

It has been specified in the Constitution itself that the federal government is not supposed to be focused on making laws that direct individuals in such manner.  As a matter of fact, most such lawmaking is left to the states.

As a state issue, even if a person lived in a state that decided to adopt a similar setup, a person doesn't have to tolerate or accept it.  They can move to another state that doesn't force such things on it's residents.

That is "Liberty" people.  Being able to have the ability to choose, even if by location of residence, for yourself.

The people who wrote the Declaration of Independence and those of the Constitution were highly concerned with removing themselves from the strangling grasp of a government that did much the same in terms of forcing people to buy certain goods, pay certain taxes, etc...

Think of the ramifications.  You buy what they tell you to buy, you sell what they tell you to sell, you use the currency they tell you to use and only what they tell you.

This government is turning into exactly what those "forefathers" broke away from, for many of the same reasons.

Folks, don't let the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt that these politicians spread push you into giving up your liberty.  They want to lull us into a false sense of security that trades our citizens liberties for a feeling of safety that doesn't really exist.

Capitalism isn't as bad as people think it is, but it isn't all that great either.

What is "capitalism" when you really get down to it?

Capital is money and at it's most basic, capitalism is using money to make more money.

Investing is capitalism.

Making loans is capitalism.

Banking is capitalism.

Like so many other things, capitalism, on it's face isn't a "bad" thing.  It's a tool.  A method of doing things.

Like so many other tools, capitalism can be abused.  A shovel is just a tool to dig dirt until someone uses one to hit another person in the head with.  Then it has been abused and everyone will want to require shovels to be registered, licensed and restricted.

The bigger problem here isn't using money to make money.  As long as there are people willing to ask for and accept the capitalists offer, it will be a viable and promoted system.

No, the bigger problem is when other options of gaining necessary capital have been eliminated or made obsolete intentionally by the government so that entrepreneurs and other business people have no alternative but to resort to and rely on the capitalists in order to do business at all.

What has been happening in this country is that all levels of government have been acquiescing to corporate demands on everything from zoning to wages to insurance requirements and regulating to the point of absurdity.

This has created an environment of near "necessary" dependence on capitalists.  A business, especially small businesses, can't afford to comply with regulations and requirements  unless they have access to huge amounts of capital.

Going back to a point made just a few moments ago, where did a great many of those regulations and requirements come from?  Corporate lobbying of the government.  Keep in mind that corporate lobbyists are almost always paid and funded lobbyists.  Giving them greater access to elected representatives and goverment officials that the regular un-paid and "maybe" funded community lobbyist will ever have.

Take a look at many of the ordinance, legislative bills and Congressional bills that are being considered currently and those that have been considered and voted on in the past.  One interesting thing to find out about those bills and ordinances is who was lobbying for and against them at the time of their consideration.

It's amazing to see just where corporate lobbyists have tried to exert influence on things that, on the surface, may seem to be un-related to them.

As the old saying goes, follow the money.

The more requirements and regulations the government lays on the people, the more the people are require to resort to capitalists to loan or invest money because the costs related to compliance are so great, one cannot afford it on their own.  Unless they are a capitalist themselves.

Go to your local library sometime and look up business trade names and ownership.  Find out who owns what and pay attention to how many corporations have become capitalists in their own right.  Buying and selling other companies, investing and making loans of their own, lobbying the government to regulate, require and register all areas of daily life thereby ensuring people will have to come to them to purchase or request funds from them.

Yes, capitalism is being abused badly in the U.S.A. and it's not just the "bad boys" who care only for money who are to blame.

It is our own elected representatives and government employees who cater to and capitulate with these abusers to make it possible as well.

No,  I am not against capitalism at is basic as one of several tools for people to engage in business in America.

I am against it being the only or primary tool and the government selling out to capitalists in order to put and keep capitalism in that position.

America grew and thrived not because of capitalism, but because of entrepreneur-ism.  The average person being able to put a product oraervice as a business up and through a combination of blood, sweat, tears and yes, money, become successful on their own right  to become an source of stability and support for their family and their community.

It's that kind of creativity and investment of self that built America.  Capitalism, especially back then, was only one part of the equation and it wasn't required for everyone to rely on capitalists to succeed.

Not anymore.

Constitutional Facilitation vs Governed Profiteering

There was a time and place when people could make their own way.  When a person had food or didn't have food.  Had shelter or no shelter, clothes or no clothes.  Everything.  All of it depended on them.  If they took the initiative to go out into the world, catch, grow or collect their own resources and put them to use.

There was a time when a person could live their own life and decide for themselves if they liked making or growing or catching, etc.. something in particular.  It was something they were particularly good at and could turn that into an opportunity for trade to get other things. 

People didn't need "governors", they just needed opportunities and access to resources. 

People need facilitators.  People who through a collective agreement select one person or a group of people to make sure those opportunities and resources are available for everyone.  People who don't ration the resources, just ensure that access to them is open to anyone equally and equitably.

What we have now though are governors.  People who instead of seeing the people around them and saying "I have to make sure that all these people can get to what they need to take care of themselves", instead say " I have to take care of all these people."

Do you see the difference there?

A facilitator tries to make sure you have what you need to do the job yourself.  A governor tries to do the job for you.

When we vote for our elected representatives, are we voting for governors or facilitators?

If you read the U.S. Constitution, pay attention to how things are worded.  It's worded the way it is for a specific reason.

The Constitution was written largely for facilitators.  It uses words that show the citizens as individuals and the elected as representatives.  It shows the overall purpose of those elected as facilitators.  It limits and delineates the power and authority of those elected representatives.

The Constitution itself shows the country as a land of opportunity for the individual.  The Constitution is written in such a way that, taken literally or as written, intends for people to be able to do for themselves that which they should do for themselves.

The immediate powers of the government, as written in the Constitution, are largely those needed to protect those individuals ability to do for themselves without attack and attempt at domination by another.  Another person or another country.

We are straying from the Constitution by allowing our elected representatives to think they are governors instead of facilitators.  We are straying from the Constitution by "interpreting" it of reading it as written.

Our elected representatives and those fake people that are called corporations have co-opted the Constitution and have removed opportunities for people and replaced opportunity with  allocation.

They want to control the resources and dole them out for profit instead.  That is NOT what this country and this Constitution are about.

Omaha Archdiocese Is Biased Against South Omaha

It appeared in the Omaha World Herald today that the Omaha Archdiocese office is planning to close 6 of it's 18 schools.

It just so happens that 5 of those 6 schools scheduled to be closed fall into the general area now considered to be South Omaha.  All of these five schools being south of Leavenworth street  and east of 72nd St (with the exception of St Joan of Arc school, on 74th St.)


They have only targeted one school in North-East Omaha,  just one.  They have targeted none of the schools in west Omaha.

Why is the Archdiocese picking on South Omaha parish schools?  Is it about money?  Do they not understand that parish schools are about community as much as they are about education?

Not only that, but it appears that they want to turn their system into a mini- OPS system and take administration away from the parishes and administrate them from a central committee.  Again, this goes against the grain of community oriented schools.

One last insult, they insist on using modern socialist fads in the administration of this new "district" by making everything "fair" in terms of how schools fund raise, how schools get enrollment and what students are enrolled into which schools.

In order to push their agenda, they have limited the number of people who can attend and represent a given school at the meetings.  No, they want to dominate the situation and not let the community as a whole in on what effects the whole community. 


Fellow Omaha residents and fellow residents of South Omaha, please do not take this lightly or quietly.  Even if your children do not attend local parish schools, at least stand up for South Omaha.  The Archdiocese office apparently thinks that we do not care or support our community and can manipulate us in any way they want.

Write the archdiocese office letters, emails, go to the office and express your dis-satisfaction.

Don't let them get away with shutting down primarily the South Omaha parish/community schools.

The Voters are speaking, but who are the politicians listening to?

The anti-SOPA/PIPA activity is going into action today with many major websites joining smaller websites in completely blacking out or bringing attention to the nightmare that is our lawmakers latest concoction.

Many lawmakers say "but, IP theft is a real problem and something must be done."

You know, IP law has gone beyond all credibility in that our lawmakers have allowed corporations to own IP (which I think only "real" people should be allowed to do.  They don't allow corporations to vote do they?  No.) and have extended the lifespan of IP protection well beyond any use or need of the lifetime of a "real" person.

So, they have allowed corporations to dominate IP and keep things from entering the public domain in a reasonable amount of time.  At the same time, they seem to not understand why people are sick and tired of putting up with IP laws that favor corporations and essentially punish "real" people.

Trademarks, copyright and patents were intended to allow real people to gainfully profit from their own works for a reasonable length of time that was tied to the lifespan of a real, living and dying person.  After a certain point, that work then enters the public domain so that all people may benefit freely from it.

But not when corporations get involved.  First of all, the gov't recognizes corporations as "people" to a limited extent.   Corporations can "own" property and IP.  Here's the big difference, corporations don't die and they don't have other people ""inheriting" property.

Corporations like Disney have lobbied the gov't to extend IP protections for way longer than the life span of a real person and they keep pushing to have  it extended further.  Why? Pure profit motive, that's why.

If something finally leaves IP protections and enters the public domain, they can't squeeze another penny out of us for it.  They would rather see something destroyed than to let it enter the public domain.

Now, corporations are in a limited way, seen as a "person" by the gov't.  However, they are not allowed to vote in elections. no, they cannot.

Yet, our elected representatives seem to pay little attention to the real people who vote for them and give far better service and attention to those who line their pockets so that they can run an expensive campaign so that real people will vote for them.

No, there's no reason real people, voting citizens, should be upset that the politicians represent the corporations interests moreso than "real" people's interests is there?

Like the Supreme Court recently said,  corporations are recognized as people with rights too.  They just upheld that corporations have the right to unrestricted free speech.   We all know that corporations speak the language of money.  This means they can dish out as much money to politicians as they want to.

Good to know that the politicians have got the voting person's back on that.

Let's place the blame where it belongs

So many people want to blame the big evil corporations for their efforts to buy out our elected representatives and place everything in the favor of those corporate desires.

It's true that I am no fan of crony capitalism or corporates that exist pretty much as predators in the market.  Having said that, it's not all their fault for the way things are turning out.

It's hard to place all the blame on the shoppers who are just taking advantage of every "for sale" sign that gets put out in front of them.

That's right.  You can only buy off those people willing to be bought.  Many of them not only let themselves be talked into selling out, far too many actively and intentionally go into public service wearing a "for sale" sign around their necks.

So, don't "occupy" Wall St.  Instead, go occupy the senate, the house of representatives and the white house.  As long as they have the blue light special going on, the corporate shoppers will continue to try to buy them off.

Oh yes,  I know, you are jaded and have no real belief that there is such a thing as an honest politician.   I am right there with you.  However, just because something doesn't live up to the expectations set for it doesn't mean you give up on those expectations.  You redouble your efforts and try again.

Our Constitution is a a set of ideals, objectives, goals.  It's what the people who wrote it saw as what we as a country of united and free individuals "can" be.  It's what people believe "should" be.  it is the bar against which we measure ourselves and work to bring ourselves to where it is, not sit back and complain that it's too hard and demand that it be lowered to our convenience.

No my friends, to use what I feel is an apt quote by Dylan Thomas;

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light. 

In short my friends, don't give up the fight for what we believe is right.

Don't let those fakes and phonies who would pretend to represent our best interests get off so easily.

Make them live up to the expectations of our Constitution.

If only there were a... pt 1

If only there were a test people had to pass in order to register to vote.

There are so many people who are un-educated or worse, mis-educated about our government and how it works it's just pitiful.

Every local elections commsions office needs to offer a basic "how our government works" class that people must participate in before they are issued a voter registration card.

No, They should not offer opinion and rhetoric regarding political parties or anything like that.  Simply  the basic principles of the U.S. Constitution, the local state Constitution and the mechanics of our election system.

Of course, the arguments against that will be that it's too expensive, it's too easy to manipulate, someone will incorrectly claim it violates their rights (any right/law can be regulated, just not totally eliminated look at the 2nd amendment for examples of that in action).

Rights That Americans Are NOT Guaranteed

We are NOT guaranteed the right to be rich.  The accumulation of financial wealth is something that happens due to a combination of sound decision-making, good social networking and the effort and determination required to be successful.

We are NOT guaranteed the right to be "Right".  Just because one person makes a choice and carries out an act or expresses an opinion does not mean that everyone else is required to agree and support it.  No one is forced to go along with everything you think or do just because it will make you feel better.

We are NOT guaranteed the right to governmental "care".  The federal government, as spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, is responsible for very specific, spelled out tasks and duties.  If it is not spelled out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, it's on you and the State you live in to see things get done.  Just because someone wants to sit back and let someone else do the work and pay the bills doesn't mean they have a right to expect it of the government.

We are NOT guaranteed the right to say or do anything we want without repercussion.  Too many ignorant people have not actually read the Constitution and think that "Freedom of Speech" means they can do or say anything to anyone at all and that they will face no repercussions.  WRONG.  The Constitution only spells out that you cannot be punished, imprisoned, etc.. by the government for expressing your thoughts, ideas and opinions.  If you say or do anything to anyone else, you have no protection from being sued, popped in the mouth or other responses as they see fit.  So, think twice before opening your yap.

This will be added to as I see examples of idiots in action expecting rights that they do not actually have.

Defining Ourselves Into A Corner

Just exactly WTH is a "Conservative" or a "Liberal" as we understand it these days?

I mean,  at it's most basic, being conservative used to mean doing something or approaching things "By The Book".  Adhering closely to established rules and methods.

Conversely, to be "liberal" simply meant that one saw said rules, etc  more as "guidelines", flexible and malleable as one wanted to hold to them.

Of course, to confuse things even more, we can toss in "progressive" and "traditional" as well.

Now really, people of either "conservative" or "liberal" bents could also be "progressive" or " traditional" at the same time.

Because again, in simple terms, to be "progressive" means that one is always open to expansion and change going forward.  While "traditionals" tend to hold back and view change as something to be cautious of.

Nowadays, many people simply lump "progressive liberal" and " traditional conservative" as like terms.  That isn't always the case though.   Many people who refer to themselves as "conservative" are also very progressive at the same time.  The modern republican party reps are great examples of that.  Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive conservative way back in his day, so it's nothing new.

Using these very simple definitions of the terms,   I am very "conservative" in regard to the U.S. Constitution.  It is what it is and don't screw with it unless absolutely necessary.

At the same time,  I am somewhat liberal in terms of how it, the Constitution is in regards to how it is enforced.   I believe that while the laws and rights are what they are, it requires a case by case examination to be truly a "just" society.  Taking all things into consideration instead of this nitwitted notion of "zero tolerance".

I am traditional and not progressive at all in terms of  I don't think there needs to be many, if any, new laws made.  Instead, there are many that need to be removed and then new ones brought in only if there is an overwhelming need for them.  Not just this idea of "If only one (fill in the blank) is saved with this law..."  Oh heck no.  Talk to me if we're talking about saving hundreds, better yet, thousands by doing the new thing, not just one or two.

Don't tell me it's not fair, life isn't fair, deal with it.  No one promised that it ever would be fair, no one has the right to expect it to be fair.  Get over it, move on, next case.

The more folks try to manipulate these definitions, make them more complex, the more you can be sure they are just trying to make themselves feel or look  better about their position.