FUNGAZI.COM

I find it very interesting that when Barack Obama spoke at the Jesuit run Georgetown University his staff went to great trouble covering up the symbols of Christianity in Gaston Hall where he spoke and they were especially insistent about covering the symbolic representation of the name of Christ that otherwise would have appeared on the wall behind him approximately eight to ten feet over his head. Georgetown University was, after all founded by the Jesuit order which is also known as The Society of Jesus and the symbolic IHS has represented the name of Jesus and is considered sort of a trademark of the Jesuit Order for centuries. Without regard for anything other than appearances the symbol was covered with a piece of plywood painted black during Obama’s speech. This is not the only time that Obama’s staff members have appeared to be somewhat phobic about the symbols of the Christian religion but we can only assume that their actions are not personally motivated by their own feelings, but like all good staffers, they intuit the mood of their boss and are carefully attuned to his likes and dislikes and the general assumption is that Barack Obama has little toleration for Christianity these days. Admittedly he went to a Christian church off and on for years but it was more a forum for the festering animosity felt towards white people than a legitimate church. All things considered that “church” and the “churches” frequented by skinheads and members of the KKK have much in common despite their rabid, bug-eyed, ignorant hatred of each other. Regardless, Barack Obama has claimed, in the past to be a “Christian,” whatever that might mean these days, but he has resolutely disengaged himself, his family and the American government from all things “Christian” in appearance for the sake of his interpretation of the separation of church and state.

However, it appears that Barack Obama’s personal interpretation of the separation of church and state is somewhat selective in application because it does not appear to affect his perspective on the religion of Islam. He has frequently opened his speeches to the people of the Muslim Middle Eastern nations with praises to Allah and his attempts to mitigate the “misunderstandings” between Mohamed’s fundamentalist fanatics and the Western nations are steeped in Muslim rhetoric and references to the Quran. Whether or not this implies some inconsistency in Mr. Obama’s policies towards religious matters or not is difficult to say. I don’t want to unfairly pick on the poor guy. His performance has gone from optimistic to wacky chaos to socialistic to unreasonable to just about every extreme that exists, and for me to come along chucking religious confusion on top of the pile of previously demonstrated inconsistencies seems a bit unfair and finicky, but then again, I’m just voicing my opinion and it isn’t as if he reads every critical comment I write.

Having grown up in a predominantly “Christian” society I suppose my view could be somewhat biased despite my lack of both faith and belief in a kind and compassionate Christian God. Understandably, the beliefs of the Christian church remain strong in American society and the religious beliefs, teachings, and superstitious nonsense of the ignorant masses associated with the fringe of Christianity’s more acceptable divisions are imprinted on those who are subjected to them at an impressionable age. In some cases this imprinting is indelible and has long lasting implications throughout the existence of the the individual subjected to it. In other cases these teachings are rejected out of hand despite the extreme youth of the child and their tendency towards being impressionable. The bullshit detectors of children are, more often than not, fairly accurate and operational at far earlier ages than modern science allows.

I will not be distracted into offering proof of that statement, therefore, the reader is free to accept or reject it as they will, and little, if any sweat will accumulate on my hairy backside in consequence. I will state, however, that I remember, as a very young child forced to regularly endure the imbecilic tortures of Presbyterian Sunday School, I consciously rejected them as being utterly absurd at the approximate age of six. My views on whatever transpired prior to that singular point in time where rejection occurred remains hidden, if it even exists, in the farthest uncharted regions of my subconscious. Advanced Senility may bring it out and I may spend my advanced years frustrating caretakers with never ending repetitions of “B -I -B – L – E, Yes that’s the book for me” and “Jesus loves me yes I know, cause the Bible tells me so.” See! That’s exactly what I am speaking of. Rejected yes; forgotten no. Those things are added to the accumulation of junk we call ourselves, and like it or not, they become incorporated into the personality of each of us. Furthermore, whether or not it is politically correct to mention it or not, the United States of America was founded on thick layer of Christian principles by a group of men who were predominantly Christians, practicing or not, and the essential aspects of Christian morality is glaringly evident in the words they spoke, the documents they left behind and the legislation they passed in the formative years of this nation. Christianity is so embedded in American law and thought that any attempt to eradicate it entirely would result in great division and conflict. The religion has changed as have the people who practice it. Overall, Christianity is far less judgmental and narrow-minded than it once was; the churches perspective of good and evil have become so diluted over the years that it is difficult to tell one from the other, but the rigidity of stubborn dogma has survived among many and theological tradition is still the fuel of staunch religious conservatives who are more than eager to fight, tooth and nail, for their continued existence.

Despite my personal belief that Barack Obama is neither Muslim nor Christian, I have nothing to support that assumption beyond his own actions and words. He appears willing and eager to step on Christian morality, theology and tradition, but he pussyfoots around Muslim theology like he is afraid of offending the Islamic sensibilities. I suppose some of that can be excused by the volatility of 1.5 billion, mostly ignorant and highly emotional Muslims who are characteristically well known for their propensity to violent outbursts and childish tantrums. Christians rarely riot these days. Given the extreme dilution of their current beliefs they may well be the most tolerant people on the planet because they’ve lost the ability to tell dark from light and good from bad. They have the capacity to forgive the most depraved acts with unwarranted justifications and a perverse sense of understanding. On the food chain of religion, Christianity has lost its teeth, its claws fell out and its glossy lush fur is now tattered and mangy. Jesus might be still tenaciously hanging on but all by all indications he may soon be living in the attic storage room alongside Zeus, Pan and Osiris. Mohamed’s teeth have been honed to sharpened spikes and the Islam of today thrives largely on the ignorance of the poor and impoverished. Nearly 1400 years after the final prophet of a vengeful god became food for the worms, his followers are pushing their twisted interpretations of his words back to the top of the blood drenched heap where all great religions attain dominance. If he were alive today he, like Jesus would be living in anguish as his tear filled eyes took in the mutant form of the child he once fostered, but to the everlasting gratitude of today’s Muslim manipulators, Mohamed is dead and cannot contest the blood thirsty, death dealing beast that has been brought to life by devious and demonic men he would have harshly rejected out of hand fourteen hundred years ago. In the grand scheme of things, it matters little. Barack Obama is a cowardly despot, a quality shared by many American politicians. He has no personal integrity, no strength of purpose, no internal sense of direction, and no capacity to comprehend or differentiate between that which is good and that which is evil. He is only concerned with his ceaseless struggle for power, the capricious winds of fate blow him this way and that and what he supports today may be the very antithesis of what he supports tomorrow because he lacks all sense of conviction and he quakes in fear before the awesome responsibility of leadership, a simple word that he cannot begin to fathom.

Obama can easily insult the community of Christians because it is a popularly accepted practice among the academic elitists he favors. He can condemn America’s poor and ignorant for turning to their religion and their guns for solace in tough times because it is pleasing rhetoric to the ears of over-educated fools who are more than willing to pay $30,000 for the chance to share a plate full of rubbery chicken with a man of no real substance and great authority. It is easy to forget and to dismiss the hopes and dreams of the majority when you surround your over bloated un-meritorious self with well-blessed sycophants untarnished by hard labor, demolished dreams and a phobic desire to avoid the unwashed masses of middle-class, high school educated workers who pull on their cheap jeans before the break of dawn with callused hands and the knowledge that another day’s labor is near at hand. From the window of a chartered jet, all of mankind appears small and inconsequential; their problems are distant and weightless. It is safer and much easier to guess what those minuscule figures below by assessing the data accumulated by professional bean counters. But who’s to say that the bean counters don’t have their own agenda? When lost and without guidance will a broken compass serve as well as an accurate compass or would sheer arrogance prompt the fool to throw both aside as so much unnecessary weight and proceed without benefit of either assured in the knowledge that, as master of all they see, there is no cause for concern. Can any of us honestly believe that Barack Obama would embrace the far more ignorant and decidedly more unwashed masses of the Muslim world than he has their Christian counterparts? I have serious doubts that he would.

I am still trying to figure out why Obama came out in support of Manhattan’s Park Place mosque, not that it was the wrong thing to do, but for a man that will not stand in front of a symbol of the Christian God, purportedly because of the separation of church and state, announcing his support for this mosque during a White house celebration dinner for the beginning of the Muslim Ramadan seems a bit risky, if not outright hypocritical.

For Barack the magnificent, the one true god is power and authority. He will direct his minions to pick up ever scrap and pebble of it that his trained eye picks out, his back will not bend and he will not dirty his manicured hands when he has others to do the work for him. If he has any conviction it is that power leads to greater power as wealth leads to greater wealth, this is the essence of his being and the substance of all that he worships. The religion of power is amoral, it acknowledges no concept of good nor evil but encourages it’s followers to advantage themselves of whatever means are at hand to avail themselves of further gain. Manipulation, slant, spin and omission are the rituals of it’s worshiper’s attainment and elevation.

I have few doubts that Barack Obama will be a one term president, and if he continues as he has, that term may be far shorter than normal. History will not be kind to Barack the Magnificent, and if we manage to survive the remainder of his time in office then we may live long enough to repeat the mistake as we have so many times before.

During the most prolonged presidential campaign in American history Barack Obama consistently promised an honest and transparent administration, a government free of the influence of lobbyists, and an end to the partisan bickering and deadlock.

Across the nation the American news media gave Obama their whole-hearted support, handled his opposition with extreme prejudice, omitted facts about the candidates on both sides that, if published, could have altered the outcome of the election, and portrayed Barack Obama as the voters only reasonable choice to undo the work of George W. Bush after they had spent the previous eight years convincing the general populace was the spawn of Satan.

One and a half years after Obama first sat down in the oval office it is clearly evident that his campaign promises had less substance than any presidential candidate in the political history of the United States. His economic recovery plan has proven to be an abysmal and expensive failure. If anything his convoluted programs have made matters far worse than they were before. Home foreclosures are increasing at an alarming rate, the banks are refusing assistance to those who do not fit into narrowly defined categories, their interest rates have escalated and the manipulated unemployment rate is nothing more than a fantasy to hide the fact that more American citizens are unemployed than ever before. The jobs that have been created are all in newly created or expanding government departments and that simply means that out taxes will inevitably be increased to pay those wages.

Every important piece of legislation passed at Obama’s insistence, from the Economic Recovery Act to the infamous Obamacare, will rape the paychecks of the American workers like never before. By 2020, 50% of every dollar earned by American workers will be sucked up by the federal government to pay for the entitlement programs that Obama has created. In direct proportion to the financial hardship of these burdensome taxes, the productivity of American workers will fall like a stone. Effectively, Barack Obama has made us all slaves of the federal government and slaves have little reason to show initiative. Given the fact that Obama still has another two and a half years to go and his “to do” list is growing, 50% by 2012 may be a conservative estimate; it could be higher; much higher. We could end up with a little as 15 cents on the dollar for every hour worked.

Barack Obama swore that he would change the way this country was governed and he has certainly accomplished that. For the first time in the history of this free nation, the American people are getting a taste of what it feels like to live under a totalitarian regime. His legislative acts mandate obligatory individual compliance under threats of financial penalties and possible incarceration.

Agreements and deals are hammered out with special interest groups and multinational corporations behind closed doors and without regard for the opinions of the majority. Instead of choices and options we are handed orders and no logical explanations are offered. The rhetoric flows like water through a burst dam but it is all meaningless drivel and what we, the American people, see has little comparison to what we have been told.

All things considered, it appears that the federal government, a government that is now defined in every detail by a despotic president, is entirely oblivious to the common sense street logic shared by even the youngest of society’s disposable population; that is, even the smallest mouse, when cornered and sufficiently badgered, will come out fighting.

The fastest growing belief in the United States today is that the federal government has become the number one threat to American freedom and liberty. The average citizen of this nation, whether registered to vote as a Democrat or a Republican, has little, if any trust remaining for Washington’s political processes, and most of these individuals have come to the obvious conclusion that the political party they are, or were affiliated with has no intention of fixing the problems or relieving the burdens they are being forced to shoulder. In short, the American people are getting a good feel of what it is like to be the cornered mouse.

These are dangerous times, federal, state and local laws have done everything possible to limit the American people’s access to firearms and ammunition and the primary motivation for these restrictions has less to do with public safety than the entirely justifiable fear that is felt by the elected officials that have chased that mouse into the corner.

The anxiety is building like the rumble of an approaching earthquake; a tidal wave that will destroy all in its path. Revolutions are unpredictable events. Like highly unstable explosives, they often go off for no apparent reason. The arrival of a shipment of tea touched off the string of events that started the American Revolution,

The 1965 riots that shook Southern California and touched off riots in many other large metropolitan cities around the nation began with a simple traffic citation. The full force of numerous Southern California police departments and a well-armed compliment of the California National Guard were powerless to stop any of it, and in the end it petered out of its own accord.

Following the revolution in Great Britain; also known as the Glorious Revolution of 1688, Richard Price, a Protestant minister, stated with conviction, “ Tremble all ye oppressors of the world! Take warning all ye supporters of slavish governments. . . . Call no more reformation, innovation. You cannot hold the world in darkness. Struggle no longer against increasing light and liberality. Restore to mankind their rights; and consent to the correction of abuses, before they and you are destroyed together. “

The French Revolution which began in 1798 was the result of situations very similar to what we are seeing today in the United States. High unemployment, unsustainable national debt, ever increasing taxes, a complete lack of transparency in government, numerous failed reforms and the conspicuous consumption of France’s wealthy elitists who cared little for the common man forced to prop up their lifestyles.

The word “Revolution” stems from the Latin word “revolutio” which simply means “to turn around.” Essentially, with respect to governments, a revolution would be a fundamental change in the authority and/or the procedural and organizational structures. Characteristically, revolutions are not protracted events of extended duration; most are very brief and many happen literally overnight or in a brief span of days. Despite what many people believe, revolutions are actually quite common throughout history and they vary broadly with respect to methodology, length and motivation. There is a great deal, if not excessive, amount of debate among leading (and mundane) historians, sociologists, political scientists (an oxy-moron if there ever was one), and the essential factor that most, if not all of these over-educated scholars agree upon is that revolution, as a social phenomenon, is a highly complex matter. I would venture to say that the more educated the scholar, the more complex the matter becomes, and more factors (related and unrelated) are involved in that individual’s explanation. While I am certain that all of those studies have some degree of merit and credibility, and any serious student of history would undoubtedly benefit by studying what these individuals have to say, I can state with complete confidence and absolute certainty that the entire topic can be summed up very succinctly.

All forms of government eventually resort to totalitarianism if they did not start there to begin with. Totalitarianism results in ever-expanding oppression. When the oppression becomes so burdensome that existence becomes problematic, the proverbial mouse is in the corner with no means of escape except through the oppressor.

All forms of government ultimately, but in very slow incremental steps, evolve into tyrannies. Initially the people governed welcome the changes that lead to tyranny because they are fearful of real or imagined catastrophes. These fears are encouraged and often initiated by the government and its politicians as a means of gaining political power over the governed. All changes in government result in the growth of that government and all growth in government is paid for by the governed in the form of taxes paid under the coercive threat of punishment including, but not limited to financial attachments, fines and/or imprisonment. In direct proportion to the size and continued growth of the government the natural rights of the governed are slowly reduced thereby transferring the authority of the capricious and untrustworthy individual to the wise and benevolent government.

In case I confused you with the term “natural rights,” I am speaking of the rights that all animals on the planet Earth are endowed with at birth, such as the right to associate with, or not associate with those of your choosing, the right to attain the highest degree of satisfaction possible considering your personal abilities and limitations, the right to come and go as you please, when you please, the right to make all the racket you are capable of making as well as the right to make no racket at all if that is to your liking, the right to live freely in the world and universe as you have the capacity to comprehend it, and the right to defend yourself and the territory you claim against all predators, invaders and thieves. These “natural rights” were, with respect to American citizens, once considered “inalienable.” “Inalienable,” as it was used in the “Bill Of Rights” means something that cannot be taken away or altered by the government.

Eventually, the government grows to a point where it can no longer be sustained by mere taxation of the governed. At this point the government begins to borrow money from other governments under a variety of arrangements. The idea here is that the governed will ultimately be forced to pay the bill with additional taxes. Because the government does not stop growing, it continues to borrow money and the debt grows larger forcing the government to use the tax revenue it takes in to make the payments. When the tax money is used to make those payments there is no money left to do the things that the taxes were imposed for originally, and inevitably, since many things must be done regardless, even more money is borrowed and the debt begins to grow at a faster rate than the government. When the need to pay the debt outstrips the obligation to perform the duties of office the government begins to legislate all manner of bizarre laws and regulations in the hope that these laws will increase revenues, hide their predicament or reduce the overall debt by favoring the debt holder in some manner that is deemed financially beneficial. The majority of these seemingly bizarre laws adversely impact the people governed and they do so in ways that may not be readily apparent and by the time the consequences do become obvious it is too late to do anything about it.

We have long passed the point described in the last few paragraphs. Our government is bankrupt and its continued existence is contingent on its ability to borrow further money from foreign entities. If the borrowing stopped as of this minute, it would be hundreds of years before we would be free of debt, but it is not stopping now and it will not stop as long as we continue to elect irresponsible morons to positions of political importance. No amount of outstanding oratorical skill spilling from the mouth of Republican or Democrat is going to alter this fact of life. Our elected leaders have basically sold us all into slavery for the remainder of our lives, furthermore, the next six generations of Americans, your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and all the way out to their great grandchildren have been sold into slavery just to pay the debt that now exists. If this situation remains as it is today, by the time Barack Obama leaves office in 2012 there will be 12 to 16 future generations sold into slavery, and the president who inherits Obama’s legacy will have little choice but to continue down the same identical path. There is no practical or possible modification, alteration or reform measure that our current government can implement that will have even the slightest effect on the inevitable consequence of the outrageous actions of both current and past elected representatives in Washington D.C.; the government cannot solve the problem because they are the problem and they want to continue being the problem as long as they possibly can.

The mouse cannot get out of the corner by switching oppressors. It cannot resolve it’s predicament by voting for new forms of oppressive torment. It has but one path of escape and eventually it will overcome its natural timidity and summon the courage necessary to do what it must.

Technorati Tags

inalienable, opression, tyranny, Revolution, Barack Obama

digg this | del.icio.us

In celebration of Barack Hussein Obama’s monumental failure as the 44th and current President of the United States, I have been reviewing the history of past Democratic presidents searching for indications of competence, and I have come to the conclusion that the last Democratic President that lasted full term and had the slightest amount of credibility was probably Harry S. Truman. JFK might have made a good president if he had of avoided that trip to Texas. Lyndon Johnson illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King but nobody has ever figured out why, Jimmy Carter was, next to Obama, was probably the worse excuse for a president this country ever had and Bill Clinton was a skirt chasing clown, but Truman had the huevos to end the war with Japan in a completely horrific display of genocidal insanity, and most of all he kept a sign on his desk that said “The Buck Stops Here.” Simply stated, Truman was the last Democratic president to accept completely the responsibility for his actions and we haven’t seen another Democrat like that since then.

Barack Hussein Obama does not see himself as an abysmal failure, he sees everyone around him as being too stupid or cowardly to make the proper choices that are so evident to him. If everyone simply went along with his program things would be fine, or at least, that’s what he would have us believe. His criticism of the Bush administration’s response to hurricane Katrina was louder and more outrageous than most of his compatriots, but Obama’s response to the environmental disaster ongoing in the Gulf of Mexico makes G.W. Bush look positively brilliant by comparison. Obama’s solution to the oil spill so far has been to let the people who created it take care of the problem while the entire U.S. government sat on its butt doing less than nothing. Even when foreign countries offered to loan us the use of state of the art oil skimmers that would have helped considerably we said “no thank you,” BP’s taking care of the situation. Oil literally gushed into the gulf for 85 days before BP finally got a handle on the situation and whether or not they can maintain that handle is doubtful. The pressure measured on the well are around 6,700 pounds per square inch and slowly rising. It may blow again and create an even bigger mess than it already has.

In the meantime the fishing industry in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and most of the gulf side of Florida has been, and will remain, gutted for decades to come. Barack Obama’s received tons of money from British Petroleum in contributions and he paid them back by letting them write their own ticket in the Gulf, furthermore, he’s covered for them from day one when Deepwater Horizon first exploded. He may not be the only one to take BP’s money, but in the end, he is the guy in charge. The buck stops there.

The environmental damage wrecked by the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has wreaked havoc on more than thirty endangered species, including many varieties of sea turtles, whales, the West Indian manatee, Cranes, Storks Pelicans and the American Bald Eagle. It has destroyed the breeding grounds for countless varieties of commercial and sport fish, shrimp, oysters, crabs, shellfish, the grouper, flounder, cobia, sharks, pompanos, and mackerels and sturgeons. It has destroyed the coastal wetlands and estuaries and crept into the freshwater habitats and saturated soils where thousands of animal and plants species once thrived in delicate balance. The hydrocarbon poisons will continue to encroach farther inland as time passes and the destruction may very well leave many endangered animals, fish, birds and vegetation entirely extinct.

This catastrophe was not caused by America’s thirst for oil and it was not caused by George Bush’s reckless environmental abandon. It was Barack Obama who took the money from BP and it was Barack Obama who derived the benefit of their largess. At his direction the responsible agencies stepped aside and allowed BP to have their way and now Barack Hussein Obama, the one man who sits at the top of the food chain in American politics wants us to believe that it is not his fault. “The Buck Stops Here.”

Obama tells us that the Republican Party is standing in the way of the extended unemployment benefits needed by millions of newly unemployed Americans but he neglects to mention that they are unemployed as a direct result of his economic policies and his failure to enforce the nation’s immigration laws. Furthermore, he neglects to mention that there are millions of American citizens who will not benefit from an unemployment benefit extension because they have been unemployed ever since he first took office and no longer qualify, in fact, those people are not even counted anymore because Obama does not want anyone to know how serious the situation has become until after he pays back the illegal alien advocacy groups and labor unions that put him in office. “The Buck Stops Here.”

Barack Hussein Obama does not want a sign on his desk saying “The Buck Stops Here,” because he does not want to accept the consequences for destroying the United States of America and the American way of life. He does not want his legacy to be that of the great destroyer; the man who brought America to its knees; the tyrant that slapped the chains of eternal servitude on every free American. He wants to be the emperor of a new age; the benevolent despot of a third world socialist America. He accepts no blame for the collateral damage he causes, the animals he drives to extinction, the American people he ruins, or the nation he destroys. To Barack Obama, we are the problem, we are his enemies and everything that is wrong about this nation is our fault. That is why he must force us to do as he deems necessary, because the buck does not stop with him, it never has and it never will because we are the enemy and he has made the U.S. Government our enemy. The nightmare that Barack Hussein Obama has become is the fundamental reason why the founding fathers of this Republic ensured the American people the right to bear arms.

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Technorati Tags

Barack Obama, 2nd Amendment

digg this | del.icio.us

A news article from the Las Vegas Sun was recently carried on Yourpolitics.com regarding Sharron Angle’s recent comments about what she euphemistically refers to as “Second Amendment remedies.” In case you are unaware of the fact, Sharron Angle is running against Harry Reid, the senior United States Senator from Nevada and a member of the Democratic Party. Harry Reid is also the majority leader in the U.S. Senate. A great many people despise Harry Reid, and with good cause. He is every bit as liberal as Obama, he represents only himself because he knows what is best for the everyone else, he is the consummate big government elitist, he has proven himself to be decidedly anti-American and has publically encouraged Islamic terrorists in the Middle East with comments about how disorganized the American military is (largely because of his own efforts). When Mitt Romney was running for president and suffering major body slams for being a Mormon, Harry Reid who is also a Mormon said absolutely nothing about the attacks. Understandably Romney was running on the Republican ticket and Reid is a Democrat, but you would think the guy would have enough balls to stand up and say that Romney’s religious affiliation was irrelevant. Essentially Harry Reid is one of, if not the biggest weasel in American politics today and he desperately needs to axed out of office in a permanent manner. Inasmuch as his current term is up at the end of 2010 he now finds himself facing a Republican opposition candidate, Sharron Angle. Angle has served as a Republican member of the Nevada Assembly from 1999 to 2005 and she is currently 61 years old. The Republican ticket for the U.S. Senate seat included Sue Lowden, Danny Tarkanian and Sharron Angle. Lowden and Tarkanian seemed to be carrying that race against Reid until Angle entered the race a bit behind them carrying an endorsement from the Tea Party Express rally in Washington D.C.

Personally, I believe that anyone with a live, beating heart who is not an associate of Barack Obama, a bleeding-heart liberal, a pro-open border/amnesty advocate out to redistribute the wealth by taking money from me and giving to the bankrupt financial firms would make a great replacement for Harry Reid. Anyone that meets those requirements would have my endorsement and Sharron Angle seems to do the job despite some of the weirder things she has said lately.

In the last six months Sharron Angle has given three separate interviews in which she used the term “Second Amendment remedies” and from my perspective that is called “beating around the bush.” Article II of the U.S. Constitution states, “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.” Exactly what Sharron Angle might have been trying to express with these comments is open to conjecture and since she did not explain what it was she was trying to say we can only guess at her meaning. Article II of the U.S. Constitution may very well be one of the most hotly debated provisions of the Bill of Rights. Politicians, anti-gun groups and judges have been misrepresenting Article II for nearly a hundred years and it was not until 2008 that the Supreme Court definitively came down on the side of an “individual rights” theory. Relying on textual analysis and the historical use of prefatory phrases in statutes, and a detailed exploration of the 18th century meaning of phrases found in the Amendment, the Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, confirmed what had been a growing consensus of legal scholars; that the rights of the Second Amendment adhered to individuals and that the purpose of the right to keep and bear arms extended beyond the context of militia service to include self-defense. While this finding did reverse the D.C. gun ban it did not restore the full breadth of the 2nd Amendment rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and the justices did not venture beyond the boundary of self-defense into the true intention behind why the founding fathers of this nation thought the freedom to bears arms was so vital to the continuation of freedom and liberty in the United States of America.

It can be safely assumed that Sharron Angel was not talking about the American people exercising their right to defend themselves against muggers and crack whores.

The Las Vegas Sun news article states that “Armed revolt part of Sharron Angle’s rhetoric,” however, they cast aside her rhetorical euphemism about “Second Amendment remedies” and go straight to the big question with the unbridled enthusiasm of a true bloodletter,”There’s no doubt a chunk of the electorate is angry at the federal government. But are voters willing to take up arms?”

Sharron Angle’s background falls far short of what I would consider, even remotely, radical. She has two children and ten grandchildren, graduated from college and worked as a substitute teacher for 25 years, she ran a small Christian school for two years, and taught for five years at Western Nevada Community College and served as a Republican member of the Nevada Assembly from 1999 to 2005. She owns a 44 magnum pistol and is said to be somewhat proficient with its use, but then again, lots of people own firearms so that really means nothing.

Despite her comments about people leaning towards “Second Amendment remedies” she is not endorsing them nor is she encouraging anyone to do so. If anything, I believe that Sharron Angle is expressing a warning, and while the Las Vegas Sun is free to make all the snide comments they want, and certainly, Harry Reid will use her words to imply that the woman carries all sorts of un-democratic thoughts and possible even agendas, the simple truth is that her warning carries more weight than the liberals currently running this nation want to publically recognize.

There is little doubt that a large percentage of this nation’s voting eligible individuals are far past the point of outrage at the way this county is being run. I don’t believe it is a partisan issue of Democrats vs Republicans so much as it is a matter of blatant corruption and a complete lack of representation for the general populace. Legislation is being passed to benefit special interests and large corporations while the financial burden of paying for the benefits these groups gain is dumped onto the struggling workers who, for the most part, opposed its passage. Individual rights, freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, property rights and the essential right to prosper to the best of one’s ability without undue obstruction by the government is rapidly dwindling and to a large degree the American people are beginning to see themselves as indentured servants of a government that was designed to serve them. To put it very simply, the sovereignty of the American people has been somehow turned on its head and the government has worked itself into a position where it can determine what we can and cannot do. We no longer control the government, the government controls us, and there are many people who are upset by this. “There’s no doubt a chunk of the electorate is angry at the federal government. But are voters willing to take up arms?” Good question.

Would it be possible for these angry individuals to effectively mount a revolution in the United States? Most Americans probably think it is very unlikely that any such thing could happen and the majority of politicians certainly hope that it would be impossible but as the Las Vegas Sun snidely asks “are voters willing to take up arms?” I would have to respond, “Not yet, but we are not too damn far from it.”

There are 25 million trained military veterans in the United States today, some are old and well past their prime but the majority are fairly young and all have intentionally and willingly put their lives in jeopardy for the sake of this nation at some point in time. It can be assumed, that if they felt it was important to do so once in the past it may be important to do so again in the future. After all, these are individuals who put themselves out there in front of our enemies for the sake of freedom and liberty, the sanctity of their nation and the safety and well-being of their loved ones. They did what was demanded of them and returned to a nation that has since turned its back on them and everything they fought for. A nations whose elected representatives are characteristically well known for their broken campaign promises, their ability to turn a deaf ear to their constituents and their willingness to accept cash in exchange for legislative favors subsidized by money taken from the pockets of those who voted for them. How many of those 25 million veterans are struggling to make ends meet, to pay their bill and put food on their families tables as the long tentacles of taxes and higher prices threaten to pull them beneath the surface? How many of those 25 million veterans have been forced out of their homes by banks that our benevolent government leaders felt duty bound to bail out with the tax money paid by those same veterans? How many of those 25 million veterans are unemployed or facing impending layoffs by employers encouraged by labor unions to hire illegal alien replacements simply because they work cheaper and the unions can organize them easier? How many of those 25 million veterans, now old and infirm, suffer the anxiety of watching their Social Security checks dwindle as more and more of the money they paid into that system is spent on the American born children of illegal aliens, and their only hope is to die before the last penny is spent and they are turned out to die, alone and forgotten? How many of those 25 million veterans are sick and tired of sitting back watching while the tyrants who now rule transform their nation into what they once offered to sacrifice their lives to avoid?

“There’s no doubt a chunk of the electorate is angry at the federal government. But are voters willing to take up arms?” Today the answer to that question is that they are not yet ready, but tomorrow, or the day after, a week or a month from now that may not be the case and without warning they could come roiling up from the suburbs and out of the farmlands, once again willing to give all that they have to restore the freedom and liberty they once fought to preserve. They will fight to restore their nation, they will fight to destroy the tyranny of the ruling elitists, but most of all they will fight so their children and grandchildren will be free of the chains of servitude we so apathetically accepted. The choice they face is very simple to express. It is a choice between leaving a legacy of enslavement or the gift of liberty.

Technorati Tags

src="http://static.technorati.com/static/img/pub/icon-utag-16x13.png?tag=Harry+Reid" alt=" " />Harry Reid, src="http://static.technorati.com/static/img/pub/icon-utag-16x13.png?tag=Sharron+Angle" alt=" " />Sharron Angle, freedom, liberty

digg this | del.icio.us

The Associated Press reported this last night that Barack the Magnificent attended the memorial service held at the Beckley-Raleigh Convention Center for the 29 coal miners killed in West Virginia’s Upper Big Branch mine explosion on April 5th. The article caught my eye for a number of reasons. My dad’s step-father was a retired coal miner in Southern Illinois, the state where Obama’s political career was hatched.

As a young kid I remember Southern Illinois as being a thickly wooded rural area of ramshackle clapboard little burgs that nobody ever heard of, let alone cared about. Most of those Baptist dominated enclaves were well along the road to becoming ghost towns when my family drove back there to spend Christmas with Dad’s parents in 1956. In early 1965 my parents and I made the same trip again. Barack Obama was still attending his Indonesian Muslim indoctrination. The towns and the buildings in Southern Illinois were a lot worse off, the people were even older and the thick woods had been pushed into massive snarled piles of broken splinters amidst the lunar landscape left behind by the strip mining operations raping the landscape. I sat on the back porch one evening and listed as the locals hollered halleluiahs at their vengeful God from twelve nearby churches. It was a scary place for a young dedicated pagan to be hanging out. In 1972 my first wife and I stopped there for a brief visit as we made our way back to California from upstate New York. Grandma was getting a tad bit senile; her husband was in the process of dying from black lung disease, advanced Alzheimer’s and cirrhosis. The Baptist domination was still in full swing, and the surrounding countryside looked like an R&R zone for Hell’s overworked demons. It was a brief visit; the nights were filled with the threatening sounds of blood and thunder Baptists. The last time I was there was in 1980 when Grandma kicked the bucket two days after my mom died. My three brothers and I flew back with my dad to sort through her belongings, take care of what ever needed attention and attend the funeral. The scary Baptists still ruled the area. In some parts of the country they are like America’s answer to Afghanistan’s Taliban, and their grasp over that meaningless Southern Illinois area is unrelenting. Despite the somber occasion, my two brothers and I made the 80 mile roundtrip to the next county where we stocked up on beer and tequila and spent most of our nights smoking pot (supplied by me), getting shit-faced drunk and partying among the ancient gravestones across the street from our dead grandma’s kitchen door. This was undoubtedly my two older brother’s only experience with illegal drugs and I was proud to have the chance to pervert them both. It was a short visit, probably the last time any of us were there, and we left grandma’s rarely used oven full of empty beer cans and dead tequila bottles. For all I know the Baptists may have burned the place to the ground and salted the ground to drive off any lingering taint of the demons certainly inhabiting our decaying souls. The wacko Baptists posed no threat to our combined force of hard core Los Angeles born and raised heathens. I don’t know about my brothers, but that was the last time I ventured into the fringe lunacy of Southern Illinois coal country. That was a year after Barack Hussein Obama graduated from high school. Through those visits I acquired a slight familiarity with coal diggers, the hard lives they lead, and some pretty good insight into the mentality and makeup of the desperation that drives some of this nation’s most uneducated citizens to dangerous employment that can only be endured by those with a strong belief that their brief lives in hell will be rewarded by an eternity in Baptist heaven; a truly questionable reward for a completely miserable way of life. I have a healthy respect for hard dangerous work, the people who face it daily and very little, if any, respect for unsafe employers or the government that protects them.

I am rarely surprised by the audacity of politicians, but I have to admit, Obama’s appearance at the West Virginia memorial service surprised me and that surprise was not the fact that he attended, but the fact that the families who were there to mourn the unnecessary deaths of their lost husbands, fathers and friends in, what I personally see as a government sponsored disaster, as well the tough hard-scrabble coal miners of West Virginia let that arrogant jackass and his sidekick Biden turn the negligent deaths and the entire memorial service held to honor the brave dead into a media campaign event and political circus. I have to admit that the meek subservient reception Obama’s invasion of this somber celebration received was pretty disappointing and it doesn’t say much for character or intellectual capacity of this nation’s mine workers.

This was the worst coal mine disaster in recent American history and there is no doubt the the 20 coal miners who were killed as a result of the April 5th explosion and cave in will be mourned by their family members, friends and co-workers. It was a horrible disaster that has seriously affected the lives of many, but it could have been avoided if the the U.S. Department of the Interior, the federal bureaucracy that currently oversees all mining regulations had paid attention to the fact that the mine where the explosion took place had one of the worst injury rates in the nation for six of the last ten years and had 458 safety violations in 2009 alone. Furthermore top officials in the company that owns this particular death trap let it be known as far back as 2006 that production takes precedence over safety no matter what. Safe work practices don’t make executives filthy rich, productivity in the mines is what does the trick and if corners need to be cut then to hell with safety. For a government that knows exactly how many sheets of toilet paper a person uses to wipe his or her butt, they certainly took a lackadaisical attitude towards the safety of the men working underground in a mine that appears to have gone out of its way to accumulate the worst safety record in the country. West Virginia’s Upper Big Branch mine was not just a death trap, it serves as a memorial to the U.S government’s complete lack of concern for the safety of American workers, and it should be considered a memorial to a nation whose safety laws are enacted to protect the liabilities of the American industries who treat their workers worse than slaves. American labor laws are among the weakest of any civilized nation and despite the billions of dollars funneled every year into the coffers of the Democratic Party by Labor Unions, the rights of the American workers have not significantly improved in the last fifty years. Union leaders buy political power, expensive suits and fancy cars with the dues money they squeeze out their members and the workers stupid enough to support them get force reduced into unemployment lines, replaced by illegal aliens working for half the wages, reduced benefits at higher costs, higher taxes, cuts in pay, pension plans that fall apart when they need them and a life time supply of union lies and broken political promises. Loyal union members are the most gullible bunch of sheep this country has ever witnessed. It take a unique lack of cranial capacity to justify making monthly payments for the “privilege” of being abused by your thick-hided employer and lied to by the human weasels collecting “their” share of the miniscule wages left behind by the thieving government. Coal miners in this country have been taking it from both ends for so many generations that they’ve come to see their living hell as a simple necessity of life, but I am still surprised by the warm reception reportedly given to Obama and Biden at this memorial service. Obama “the Magnificent” played the crowd better than Carlos Santana ever played the guitar and I wouldn’t have been any more surprised by his audacity if had he ended his speech with a solo rendition of “A Coal Miner’s Daughter.”

Twenty-nine men died needlessly in that hell hole and the world’s biggest fraud shows up at the memorial service like it’s just another Washington photo-op and an opportunity to spew out another artfully written collection of meaningless verbal garbage.

“Nothing we can say can fill the hole they leave in your hearts; the absence they leave in your lives. All the hard work; all the hardship; all the time spent underground; it was all for their families, it was all for you. These miners lived, as they died, in pursuit of the American dream. They lived and they died pursuing the American Dream, working in dangerous conditions underground to help keep the lights on across the country. In the days that followed the disaster, emails and letters poured into the White House, postmarked from different places across the country, they often began the same way: `I am proud to be from a family of miners,’ `I am the son of a coal miner,’ `I am proud to be a coal miner’s daughter.’ . . . And then, in these letters they make a simple plea: don’t let this happen again. Don’t let this happen again…’ “How can we fail them? How can a nation that relies on its miners not do everything in its power to protect them? How can we let anyone in this country put their lives at risk by simply showing up to work, by simply pursuing the American Dream? We cannot bring back the 29 men we lost, they are with the Lord now. Our task, here on Earth, is to save lives from being lost in another such tragedy. To do what we must do individually and collectively, to assure safe conditions underground.”

Blabbermouth Biden’s one noteworthy quote during the event was, “coal miners represent what I believe is the heart and the soul and the spine of this nation.”

It’s enough to gag a goat.

One of Obama’s more memorable campaign quotes from 2008 was his promise to bankrupt the American coal industry, eliminate coal fired power plants from this nation and by extension, put every coal miner in America out of work and destroy their way of life forever his effort to preserve the planet from the mythical extinction of environmental annihilation. His unrelenting push for cap and trade legislation will destroy the coal miners forever and put thousands of them out of the only work their families have had for four generations. It takes an unusually high degree of audacity, even for a politician to stand up at memorial service for 29 dead coal miners and say “All the hard work; all the hardship; all the time spent underground; it was all for their families, it was all for you. These miners lived, as they died, in pursuit of the American dream.” More than half of every penny those poor guys made working those underground nightmare jobs was ripped off by the U.S. government to pay for tax subsidized landscaping improvements to private golf courses they could never afford to see, or the $2 billion dollars of American tax money handed to foreign investors to pump into American wind energy projects that would help put coal mines out of business. As I said, Obama’s audacity does not surprise me at all, but what does surprise me is that he and Biden weren’t forced into a hasty retreat by a hail of rocks and bottles thrown by the coal miners these insufferable political twits are both dedicated to destroying. Furthermore the idea that anyone could restrain themselves after hearing this particular political con man utter the words, “they lived, as they died, in pursuit of the American dream,” is beyond my normally unlimited capacity for comprehension. Then again, it is entirely possible that Obama’s version of the “American Dream,” a over-regulated socialist police state where human privacy and dignity are considered a crime and the entire nation is divided into slaves and slave owners, is an American Dream that he and I do not share. I am surprised that any American coal miner would listen to it without resorting to violence, or at the very least, throwing up.

Obviously, the Democratic Party is concerned about the upcoming 2010 mid-term elections. Personally, I view the Democrat’s current state of hysteria as being unwarranted. The Republicans have effectively usurped the Tea Party’s forward momentum, but it hasn’t earned them very much. The conservatives are as divided, left leaning, and indecisive as they have ever been, and I honestly don’t see them as being any major threat to the Democratic Party’s war for total control. As the “Protectors of the American Dream” the Republican’s have failed us all miserably. The American people are still politically sound asleep and there is no indication that they will wake up any time soon. The Democrat’s rape of Lady Liberty continues unabated, while the precipice of our eternal doom gets closer every day. I am not holding my breath; the tree of Liberty is still starving for nutrients. My only response to the Democrats is “bring it on”, the worse it gets, the better I like it, eventually the American people will wake up, and when that day comes there is going to be hell to pay.

Not that it’s anybody’s business but I gave up pot and drinking years ago and I would venture to say neither of my brothers has smoked the shit since that one night in the graveyard some thirty years ago.

Technorati Tags

Barack Obama, Joe Biden, liberty, West Virginia, mine workers, Baptists, coal miners

digg this | del.icio.us

The political and philosophical concept of popular sovereignty, an idea that was first suggested by Robert the Bruce in 1320 in the “Declaration of Arbroath” when, as the newly crowned King of Scotland, he stated that his position as monarch was contingent on his continued resistance to the English nobiliy’s attempt  to control Scotland, and that if he failed to live up to this responsibility, another king would be chosen. This event took place during a period of time in which the “Divine right of Kings” was widely accepted and this radical concept of popular sovereignty appeared as new idea despite the reality that, during that time in history, if such a thing were to actually come about, the choice of a new sovereign would have been a determination reached by the privileged nobility rather than the population at large.

Some 200 years later the topic of popular sovereignty rose again as the fundamental basis of a radical manuscript written by Etienne de La Boetie, who later became a member of the Bordeaux Parliament. The expression of Boétie’s views was authored while he was still a student at the University of Orleans. The spirit of free inquiry prevalent among those privileged students was tolerated to a degree by authorities who regarded them as the musings of the intellectually immature. Despite the recognition of the University of Orleans as an enclave where free and untrammeled discussion was largely tolerated, the freedom of speech and inquiry had specific limitations beyond which few dared to venture. Anne du Bourg, the outspoken radical teacher who encouraged the youthful explorations of La Boétie serves as an excellent example of one individual who obviously stepped beyond those boundaries. As a result of her errors in judgment, Anne du Bourg was summarily apprehended, subjected to the brutal tortures of barbaric French inquisitors and ultimately she was burned at the stake for the crime of heresy in 1559. Ironically during that same year La Boétie, who by this time had become a well seasoned, but cautious member of the Bordeaux Parliament had circulated his unpublished manuscript among his most trusted peers and the ideas it expressed became highly regarded for their scintillating and profound insights. The manuscript quickly achieved considerable, but limited popularity in local Perigordian intellectual circles, but the tyrannical monarchy of the time unrelentingly maintained their iron fisted control and La Boétie’s exercise in free expression eventually faded into relative obscurity.

Essentially it was Boétie’s observation that the power of tyrants was founded upon the general population’s acquiesce to their status as slaves to the state. Furthermore, Boétie argued that a tyrant is but one person, and can scarcely command the obedience of another, let alone an entire country if the populace did not willingly give their consent, and that if a large majority of the tyrant’s subjects simply and non-violently withdrew their consensual obedience to the rule by tyrants, the weight of tyranny would quickly and suddenly collapse. Boétie naively underestimated the brutality that a tyrant would inevitably use to enforce obedience, but that consideration is of little consequence at this point in the discussion because few individuals alive at that time would dare the consequences of entertaining action on such a radical belief.

The primary concept that all forms of government required the consent of the populace which La Boétie expressed so eloquently later gave rise to two distinct schools of thought.

La Boétie’s assertion that rulers could be brought down non-violently by mass civil disobedience was later picked up by the French Huguenots and found expression in one of the most radical Huguenot pamphlets of 1575 entitled “La France Turquie.” However the most enthusiastic proponents of mass civil disobedience came along centuries later in the nineteenth century works of nonviolent anarchism’s most prominent advocates such as Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Benjamin R.Tucker. In this respect, La Boétie’s concept of non-violent mass civil disobedience as a means of quiet revolution remains evident to this day in all pacifistic anarchistic movements.

La Boétie’s most important contribution, however, the realization that all governments were founded, and entirely dependent on the consent of the populace gained prominence among the philosophical discussions by much greater individuals such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Furthermore, the concept of popular consent flowered under the inquisitive minds of these learned men, and it was their philosophical explorations that so heavily influenced men like Samuel Adams, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson as they sought to resolve the oppressive burden of British rule.

The concept of popular sovereignty underwent a complete transformation in the New World events as they inevitably led up to the American Revolution. Whereas, in the European historical context, the concept of popular sovereignty was little more than an interesting topic of discussion among philosophers, a topic of discussion beyond which no real or viable practical application existed because Europe remained a vast land of empires and kingdoms ruled entirely by monarchs, kings, queens and aristocratic nobility.

The rejection of the British monarchy by the American colonists was not a slowly evolving revolution of pacifistic civil disobedience such as the very refined La Boétie envisioned three hundred years earlier. When repeated attempts to resolve the issues proved to be futile and the complexity of British law became evidently far too politically wily to effectively mitigate the oppressive rule, and the colonist’s repeated attempts to exercise reason and logic resulted in further abuse, the sole path remaining became eminently clear. Working within the system was futile because the system was rigged against them. Passive resistance was futile because it was dealt with by force of armed British troops who were all too willing to enforce British rule with savage brutality. The sovereignty of the British king was resolute and the message delivered loud and clear, disobedience to the crown would not be tolerated and any attempt at disobedience would be dealt with harshly.

In this respect, the American Revolution marked a departure in the concept of popular sovereignty by breathing life into something that had previously been nothing more than a mild breeze stirred up by flapping gums. The American revolutionaries, many of whom were far less educated than the great philosophers of Europe, were quick to recognize mankind’s natural yearning for liberty and it was these such individuals who whipped the concept of popular sovereignty into a full blown class five tornado by audaciously substituting the sovereignty of King George III, with a collective sovereign composed of the people.

The American Revolution was more than a battle between well disciplined British troops against dysfunctional groups of colonial insurgents; it was a rejection of what the vast majority of the world’s inhabitants had acquiesced to for centuries, the willing subjection of individuals to the despotic tyranny hierarchy of privileged aristocracy, the never-ending lineage of royal families and the supreme mastery of absolute monarchs and totalitarian sovereigns.

The American revolutionaries were committed to the principle that governments were legitimate only if they rested on popular sovereignty. To express that idea more simply, the individuals that founded this nation were unanimously in agreement that the only form of government they would agree to give their consent to would be designed in such a manner as to provide that the full authority of that government would always remain subject to the sovereignty of the people it served.

The essence of that unanimous agreement was expressed eloquently by the American colonists in the notification delivered before the British Parliament effectively summing up the collective agreement of the American people. That document, known as the Declaration of Independence established forever the basis of humanity’s natural right to establish governance on the foundation of popular sovereignty in its first opening paragraph.

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.–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.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,–That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

As it was stated above and shall be repeated again, the American revolutionaries were committed to the principle that governments were legitimate only if they rested on popular sovereignty. To put his very simply and succinctly, the authority of the United States Government comes from the willing consent of the American people. The government of the United States did not grant the rights contained in the document called the “Bill of Rights” to the American people; those rights were given to all men by their creator. The United States government can not legally take away or modify any of those rights because the government does not now, nor has it ever had, that authority. The word “inalienable” is defined as “absolute, inherent – something that cannot be transferred or sold or taken by anyone else.” Look it up in your own dictionary.

When something is “inalienable,” it is something that cannot be taken away, something that is absolute and inalterable. When that inalienable something is abrogated, reduced, eroded, modified, or reinterpreted in any manner that alters that things meaning, structure or intent, there is another word in your dictionary that defines that action and that word is called “Illegal.” Anything that alters, erodes, modifies, limits or eliminates an “Inalienable” right guaranteed to all men under the Bill of Rights contained in the Constitution of the United States of America is also considered as “Unconstitutional,” because it is contrary to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution which specifically delineates the rules the American government must follow and the duties of each division of our government.

The basic premise stated in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence established the foundation of American law. ‘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.” No exceptions to the term “All Men” were delineated at the time this document was authored.

The United States Declaration of Independence was adopted by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776. The United States Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787 and the Bill of Rights came into effect on December 15, 1791. During the fifteen years between the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, and the effective date on which the Bill of Rights became a legitimate part of the U.S. Constitution, the heavy hand of political influence significantly altered the entire concept upon which American justice was founded.

The fundamental truth expressed in the Declaration of Independence, “all men are created equal,” became a serious threat to the financial stability of the plantation owners in the southern states who were entirely dependent of slave labor. To gain the southern state’s acceptance and eventual ratification of the US Constitution political compromise became necessary.

At the time the new nation was loosely held together by “The Articles of Confederation,” under which each colony was granted sovereignty, developed its own constitution and set of laws, and while all were dependent on the others, there was no strong central government. Furthermore, the Articles of Confederation did not consider the eventual expansion of the nation through exploration and the acquisition of previously unexplored territories. A strong central government was viewed as a necessity and a sound constitution was required to give that government guidance and order. To achieve that necessary goal sacrifice and compromise became necessary. When the southern states held out their acceptance on the fear that the elimination of slavery would destroy the slave-based agrarian foundation of their financial wealth, measures were taken to appease those fears. That compromise divided the United States of America into slave-holding states and non-slave holding states and it further provided that specific classes of humanity could be held as the property of others without regard for the essential premise that “all men are created equal. In the long run it proved to be a horrible mistake because it was a divisive decision and it pitted the northern abolitionists against the southern slave holders and even more importantly, it pitted the industrialized north against the agrarian south and that paved the path to the civil war more than the issue of slavery, however, that is a discussion for another time so I will redirect my discussion to the topic at hand.

Unconstitutional legislation is passed by the U.S. Senate, The House of Representatives, and those unconstitutional legislative acts are signed into law by the United States president on a regular basis and have been for more than 150 years, if not longer. There may be more unconstitutional amendments to our Constitution today than legitimate amendments.

Every unconstitutional legislative act signed into law by a president is accompanied by numerous sections and subsections containing provisions for additional laws, penalties, enforcement provisions, criminal statutes and so on. They too are unconstitutional because they are based on an unconstitutional legislative act. On rare occasions, an individual or group will muster the tenacity and astronomical expense to challenge some small provision implemented as part of a legislative act, and depending on the financial ability of that individual or group, they may take that battle through a number of courts over a period of many years and ultimately end up before the Supreme Court after expending a great deal of time and enough money to feed a family of five for a lifetime. The Supreme Court is the last court of appeals in this nation; it is as high as anyone can go when trying to resolve an issue. The determination of the Supreme Court justices who hear the case will render a decision on the basis of many parameters. These parameters include, legal procedures and propriety, the precedence of previous cases similar in nature, the interpretation each Supreme Court justice has concerning the provision of the U.S. Constitution in question, the facts of the case, and the politics, especially the politics of the party they are affiliated with, which is normally the political party of the U.S. President who appointed them to their position. In some cases other considerations are taken into account, such as logic, reasonableness, and occasionally, even the concept of justice. Justice is not always found in the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of the United States and numerous unconstitutional legislative acts, along with the laws affiliated with those acts are often upheld by the Supreme Court justices.

The erosion of liberty in the United States and the affect that erosion has had on the essential freedom and the inalienable rights of American citizens is the result of accumulated unconstitutional legislative acts, some of which have been upheld by the Supreme Court, and many of which have never been challenged because of the high cost of doing so and the citizens acquiescence to illegal acts that are either too convoluted to understand, or standing alone, seem insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Overall, that accumulation of great and small infringements has become very burdensome and the combined weight of all has long ago made the process of governance more and more dependent on partisan politics and the unpublished agendas of political parties whose primary concern is the solidification of one political party’s power over the opposing political party. The pursuit of those partisan agendas has little to do with preserving the natural rights of the American citizens, preserving the security of our nation or making it easier for us to prosper as individuals. The two primary political parties in the United States today are fighting a war for the absolute control of the U.S. government. This can only be achieved by attaining and maintaining an overwhelming majority in the U.S. Senate, The House of Representatives, by stacking the Supreme Court with a majority of their party’s loyal members and having their party’s candidate sitting in the White House. When all of these things are accomplished there is no division of power in the United States government and the political party that accomplishes this has effectively replaced the sovereignty of the people with the sovereignty of one political party. The Republic of the United States thus becomes an oligarchy.

An “oligarchy” is a form of government in which power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society. Oligarchies have been tyrannical throughout history, being completely reliant on public servitude to exist. When the actual differences between viable political rivals are small, the oligarchic elite impose strict limits on what constitutes an “acceptable” “politically correct” position, thus the careers of politicians depend heavily on unelected economic and media elites. When the powerful elite includes influential economic entities, such as banks, commercial enterprises, corporations and large investment firms that drive the actions of government, little regard is given to the will of the people and the entire concept of popular sovereignty goes out the window and the constitutionality of legislative acts limiting the rights of the people become more and more common.

So we here are coming down to wire, you are expecting a point that will ties together the six pages of history, dictionary definitions, personal observations and rambling verbiage and I don’t intend to let you down.

If we read the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the original U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights and enough history to put it all into context, we can see for ourselves where this government started, the intentions behind why it was constructed in the manner it was, and the cautious guarantees that the authors included in their attempt to make it, and freedom, last. If we take that knowledge and scrutinize the U.S. Constitution as it exists today with the numerous amendments, judicial legislation by the Supreme Court, and the numerous policies of the legions of law enforcement agencies (Federal and State) which, for the most part, appear to have been created out of thin air, even the most close minded human being can see that the United States government is far off the beaten path they were intended, and legally obligated, to follow. Having completed this comparative exercise, we are left with quite a few obvious questions such as “how did we get from there to here,” “who did this and why,” and my personal favorite, “what can be done to correct this problem.”

We’ve got a whole bunch of yahoos on one side saying the Democrats are right, the problems are being fixed and if the stupid Republicans would just get out of the way and let things happen everything would be fine. On the other side there’s another bunch of yahoos screaming about the whiny assed liberal commie types pushing the entire nation towards socialism, spending trillions of dollars on bullshit that nobody wants or needs and giving great gobs of money to banks who won’t give loans to people when they need them, while the unemployment rate is falling through the floor and the assholes in power are jumping on every minor event as a sign that the economy is recovering even as it slides off the cliff into Hell. In the middle of this we have a slew of different yahoos waving teabags in the air. The liberals claim they are all right-wing extremists and the Republicans are drooling all over the tea baggers as they try to sucker them into thinking that sweeping the Democrats out of power and replacing them with Republicans is the only way to save the country and reverse the damage.

The honest truth is they are all full of shit. The differences between the Democrats and the Republicans are so slight that they are barely recognizable. If the Republican Party replaced every Democrat in office in the next election nothing would change. Healthcare would not be repealed, taxes would not be lowered and the erosion of American rights would not be reversed. Nothing would change. Everything would continue as it always has, the faces would change, and everything would just go on getting worse and worse because the same deep pocket financial powers that are now paying for the legislation that is being passed by the liberals would be paying the conservatives to continue passing the same sort of asinine legislation. The people who are suppose to be the real authority behind the American government would be kept in the dark, spoon fed tons of nonsense by the American media who purposely keep them misinformed so they can’t make an informed decision about anything. The delusional idiots who think that the ability to vote one crook out of power and replace them with another crook they like better is somehow an indication that freedom still exists, that America is still a representative government where things will eventually get ironed out, balance will be restored and paradise is just around the next corner. The fact is that this never ending series of chasing one major crisis after another, the bitter power struggles between two essentially identical political parties, and the prolonged pitched battles over major legislative changes that are guaranteed to fix the problems but actually end up making them worse are nothing but intentional distractions designed to keep us all busy looking at one thing while our nation and everything it ever stood for are being systematically dismantled behind our backs.

Obviously there are a number of very serious problems facing the average working American citizen who would like to remain free to attain his or her highest level of prosperity according to their own means while avoiding the interference and obstructions thrown in their path by the overwhelming increase of government intervention weaving its way into every aspect of American life. Unfortunately the current political environment existing in the U.S. stringently opposes anyone brave enough to speak out against the growing momentum of the global agenda demanding strict limitations on American prosperity and those who appear to be less than thrilled by the bread and circus distractions thrown out to the largely baffled populace are set upon by the media wolf packs who immediately brand such individuals and groups as right wing extremists, conspiracy theorists, child molesters, racist militia members, religious nut bags, anti-abortionists and dangerous gun toting crazies. Investigations are undertaken, phony allegations are leveled on non-existing and wholly unconstitutional laws and order is restored by machine gun toting jack-booted thugs accountable to no one in authority. Anyone who is sufficiently insane enough to publicly dare exercise what they gullibility believe to be their “inalienable” rights ends up being gunned down or burnt to death in midnight raids by a half dozen government law enforcement agencies on the basis of rumors that they might be violating some minuscule regulation that is never actually proven because all the evidence of their wrongdoing is destroyed in the process of safeguarding the nation from the further spread of an insanity characterized by what the founders of this nation considered the exercise of mankind’s natural and inalienable rights and the stupidest members of our current society believe that justice is being served because they believe every salacious, filthy, unproven rumor published by the American media exposing the dangers of aberrant free thinking individuals and groups dedicated to exercising the very same rights and freedoms that once made this nation the envy of the entire world.

If you have endured my meandering style of writing through this entire article with the desire to discover some pearl of wisdom summing up the entire purpose of this exercise, then I owe you the following heartfelt advice. In the off chance that you turn your head away from the clownish antics of America’s political circus and take notice of the simple fact that all of your formerly “inalienable rights” are being gradually destroyed in a systematic manner by the government whose sole purpose for existence was to protect those rights then you are probably intelligent enough to realize that system is far past the point of being corrected from within. The American people can vote until hell freezes over and nothing is going to change until we force the corrective measures down their throats. Am I suggesting that the American people resort to violence to accomplish this task? Such a suggestion would be entirely illegal under the current laws so my answer to that question is obviously going to be “No, I would never suggest such a thing,” even if I did believe that it was the only reasonable response to the problems we face. The choice has always been ours. The American people are the true source of government authority, and ultimately, the choice between slavery and liberty rests with them and them alone.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Technorati Tags

popular sovereignty, inalienable, freedom, liberty, opression, tyranny

digg this | del.icio.us

Popular sovereignty, inalienable, freedom, liberty, oppression, tyranny

The 2nd Amendment was recognition of the danger of a government maintaining a standing army. The original intention behind its inclusion in the Bill of Rights was the recognition that if every citizen had the right to keep and bear the same type of basic arms as a soldier in the government’s standing army then it would be impossible for that standing army to inflict the will of a tyrannical government upon the people. In the 1700s, a militia included all able-bodied men over the age of sixteen. Therefore, the combined strength of the militias always outnumbered the standing army by at least twenty to one, and they were armed and well trained to use the same weapons available to the soldiers of the government’s standing army. Essentially speaking, the 2nd Amendment was intended as the ultimate guarantee that the citizens in the United States would forever remain free. When the American people of today consider the idea of a tyrannical government they consider the despotic governments they read about in the news papers; nasty little 3rd world dictators and communist nations where life is cheap and compassion rarely exercised. When the founders of this nation thought of tyrannical government it was not foreign despots they feared, but what our own government could and would eventually and ultimately become if the people did not remain vigilant, or were unwilling to protect their inalienable rights by force of arms when that government first dared to overstep its bounds and began the abrogation of those natural rights that all men are endowed with at the first instant of their creation.

Technorati Tags

freedom, 2nd Amendment

digg this | del.icio.us

I keep reading about the Tea Party in the newspaper. The Democrats never tire of blaming the Tea Party for all sorts of illegal and unacceptable actions and they even claim that the Republican Party is behind all of it somewhere. I’ve seen Tea Party web sites on the Internet and at least two of them claim to be the official Tea Party site. CPAC 2010, the annual Conservative Political Action Conference that was held in February was attended by big name Republicans and conservative Republican activists who spent a lot their time pandering enthusiastically to the Tea partiers in attendance. Their proposal to launch a “Tea Party Express” barnstorming the nation with rallies and speeches is suppose to start any day now if I remember correctly. Sarah Palin is going to be there and other well known Republican candidates will be there, and who knows, there might even be a couple of people showing up that think they are Tea Partiers.

It is pure speculation on my part to believe that anything labeled official “Tea Party” requiring personal information from individuals who unwittingly participate is either secretly run by the Republican Party or the National Security Agency. The former desires to absorb new members while the latter desires to identify individuals that the current government views as potential malcontents and possible domestic terrorists worthy of further investigation.

Personally, for the most part I think the Tea Party is the product of a liberal media’s over-active imagination spurred on by hopeful Republicans with an eye on the next election. The growing number of disenchanted has yet to be tapped as a potential source of voters.

Historically, there was no Tea Party in the sense that we now have a Democratic Party and a Republican Party. The individuals that threw the British tea into the waters of Boston Harbor were not forming a political party for the purpose of expressing their dissatisfaction with the British government. Those 200 people were pissed off and outraged because they had no representation in the despotic government that taxed them and gave them nothing in return, they were angry because they had no voice in the government that ruled over them, made and enforced the laws of their land and taxed them without considering their needs. The men who participated in what history later recorded as “The Boston Tea Party” were members of an underground organization called “The Sons of Liberty.”

As a brief diversion into the history of this group I offer the following information. If the reader is interested in finding out more about the subject feel free to do a bit of research yourself.

The early colonies were not entirely self sufficient and depended on numerous commodities that could only be imported from Britain. The British Empire decided to take advantage of this demand for goods by imposing a series of import taxes to increase their revenue. In 1733 they implemented an import tax on molasses. The purpose of the Molasses Act was not simply to raise revenue but to establish a regulation that all goods imported to the American colonies had to be purchased through British merchants. By regulating trade with the American colonies the British Parliament assured themselves a steady flow of profit to benefit the British Empire. The 1733 Molasses Act was modified in 1763 to include the importation of sugar. The Sugar Act further increased the regulation of imports to the colonies by enhancing the effectiveness of customs enforcement and expanding the import tax to a wide number of other commodities not readily available in the colonies. These efforts were less than successful as the resourceful colonists became highly adept at the art of smuggling and many of the higher priced British goods rotted in warehouses while the people purchased the goods they needed from the plethora of smugglers selling at vastly reduced prices. The British attempt to alleviate this problem by lowering their taxes was a futile effort because the smuggled goods were still cheaper.

The colonists rejected these import taxes on the basis of British constitutional law. The British Constitution guaranteed that British subjects could not be taxed without their consent. That consent could only come about if the American colonists were represented in the British Parliament. A situation the British government resolutely rejected. The British Parliament sought to overcome this difficulty by passing a law requiring all imported goods to carry a tax stamp signifying that the import tax to Britain had been paid. Anyone found in possession of a taxable item without the proper stamp could be, and often were prosecuted. The British seriously underestimated the intensity of the nearly universal opposition this regulation would create. Throughout the colonies, the peasants and middle class members of colonial society formed themselves into underground resistance groups that later became know as the Sons of Liberty. These underground groups organized tax protests, burned effigies of royal officials, drove out the Stamp Act collectors or forced them to resign and by means of pressure and threat, managed to force businessmen and judges to ignore the requirement to use the tax stamps demanded by Parliament. Throughout the Stamp Act Crisis, a period that began on November 1, 1765 when that law first became effective in the colonies until the time of its repeal, the Sons of Liberty professed their continued loyalty to the King of England.

Their continued loyalty was based on the wide-spread belief that the British King and the British Parliament were essentially fair in nature and they maintained a universal confidence that those reasonable men would eventually do the right thing, they would listen to reason, understand the logic of the colonist’s arguments, consider how best to benefit the loyal subjects of the crown and repeal the repressive tax laws that harmed so many and created so much disruption in the American colonies. Ultimately the British King was forced to relent and repeal the Stamp Act on March 17, 1766.

The group that became known as The Sons of Liberty began in August, 1765 in Boston, Massachusetts. It was led by Samuel Adams, the second cousin of John Adams. In short order the group spread throughout most of the colonies as separate groups were initiated to deal with the specific problems in those areas. Overall, their base of power comprised the entire spectrum of the early colony’s political society. Their members were from every level of social and economic level and the ranks of this underground rabble included laborers, skilled tradesmen, farmers, merchants and book keepers. While many of the groups members were considered as being in the upper class of colonial society, just as many were from the middle and lower class positions, however, class distinctions were not considered an important part of any their decision making process. Inasmuch as the British considered them all equally as seditious criminals, loyalty to the group and dedication to the pursuit of liberty surpassed all class distinctions. Some of their most prominent leaders included men like Silas Downer, Alexander McDougall, Charles Thomson, Haym Solomon, James Otis, John Adams, Samuel Adams, Marinus Willett, Thomas Young, Paul Revere, Joseph Warren, Benjamin Edes, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, Isaac Sears and John Lamb. By the time the Tax Stamp Act was repealed in 1766 the Sons of Liberty had spread completely across the American colonies and had established a well developed system of communication between the various groups.

In retrospect, Britain continued to seriously underestimate the snow-ball affect of the self-perpetuating outrage spreading across the American colonies, The British Parliament were forced to back away from the tax stamp but they remained committed to taxing the Colonists and changed their tactics entirely. In 1767 Charles Townshend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed a program that came to be known as the Townsend Act, essentially it served three purposes; to raise revenue through taxation in the colonies to pay for the salaries of British governors and judges assigned to work in the colonial districts, to improve the effectiveness and increase compliance with Britain’s trade regulations over the American colonies, and third, to establish a legal precedent that the British Parliament had the right to tax the colonies regardless of whether or not they were represented in Parliament. Another reason for the Townsend Act, though less relevant to this discussion, was to punish the colony of New York for its failure to comply with the Quartering Act of 1765, an act that required local citizens to allow British soldiers to live in their homes without compensation. The colonist’s comprehensive rejection of the Townsend Act prompted the British Parliament to order British Troops to occupy the city of Boston in 1768 which directly resulted in the Boston Massacre two years later.

The British remained committed to establishing a legal precedent that would allow them to tax the colonies and that effort was focused on the American colonist’s desire for tea. The members of Parliament felt that if they could get the American colonists to accept large shipments of British Tea accompanied by vastly reduced import taxes, the precedent would be established. Seven large ships belonging to the British East India Company were dispatched to the colonies with cargos of the precious commodity. Once in the colonies the plan was to sell the tea at a price low enough to undercut even the smugglers but at a price that would include a nearly unnoticeable pittance of import tax. This, they felt would establish the legal precedent they needed and with that success under their belts they could then raise the taxes on all future imports as high as they wanted and include everything the colonist purchased. They dispatched four ships to Boston, and one each to New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston. Between the seven ships were distributed more than 2,000 chests containing nearly 600,000 pounds of tea. The colonists became wise to the plot and opposition mounted throughout the colonies even while the ships were in route. The British consignees who were to receive the shipments upon arrival and distribute it for sale were forced to resign their positions by threat of violence. The ship bound for Philadelphia was refused entrance to the harbor and forced to return to England. The ship bound for New York was delayed by bad weather and by the time it reached port the captain found that the consignee had resigned and fled the area. With no one to receive or distribute the cargo the captain had no choice but to return to England with his cargo intact. The ship bound for Charleston faced the same problem, no one to receive and distribute the product and they too returned to England with their cargo intact. When the first of the Boston bound ships docked in Boston harbor with the mid-morning tide of December 16, 1773, they discovered that the consignees had been forced to resign, however the British appointed Governor Hutchinson was determined to hold his ground. He convinced two of the tea consignees, both of which were his sons, to not to back down and accept the delivery. A massive protest ensued as an agitated group of 7000 locals descended on the harbor area toto protest the arrival of the ship, a meeting was called among the leaders of the protest and a decision was reached among those present to demand the ships immediate departure. The envoy sent with that demand returned to advise the group that the harbor master refused their demand and was determined to offload the cargo distribute it accordingly and sell it locally regardless of what the locals wanted or demanded. The crowd was infuriated by the British attempt to underhandedly establish a precedent that would allow them to tax the colonists without the benefit of being represented but they were at a loss for how best to handle the situation. Later that evening after the protest had disbanded and order appeared to be restored, 200 colonists, many of whom were disguised as Indians, stormed the East India Company ship Dartmouth, overcame the crew and tossed the offending cargo into the chilly waters of Boston Harbor. For the timid individuals who gave up their protest earlier that day and returned to their homes the rule of British despots appeared unassailable and they were prepared to acquiesce to British despotism in order to avoid the harsh repression and chaos that would certainly result if they continued to reject British rule. The 200 men who took action into their own hands that night were active members of the Sons of Liberty and while they represented a minority among the colonists, their decisive and outrageously illegal action altered the course of history and their actions rallied the support for the revolutionaries in the thirteen colonies who eventually succeeded in their fight for American independence. The years of repression and tyranny eventually wore down the colonist’s loyalty to the British Crown. Without representation they could not work for change with the system. It was an unyielding obstacle in their path and eventually time worked to convince even the most loyal British subject in the colonies that their only hope for survival lay in casting off the yoke of oppression.

By today’s standards those tea sinking Sons of Liberty would be widely denounced as fringe lunatics, militia gun nuts, domestic terrorists, right-wing extremists, self-styled vigilantes and criminals. They would be denounced by the leaders of the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, and the entire news media. Newspapers and television broadcasts would repeatedly condemn their actions and disparage their intentions. They would be castigated and criticized loudly and repeatedly from one coast to the other. Large rewards would be offered for their capture and prosecution. The FBI would be called in to conduct an exhaustive investigation. The National Security Agency and the ATF would be involved, and the Department of Homeland Security would be conducting raids all over the country rounding up suspects and conducting interrogations with a severity far surpassing anything, real or imagined, at Guantanamo Bay. Eventually the Sons of Liberty would be cornered in some remote part of the country, and after a prolonged siege with various law enforcement agencies, the psychotic malcontents would be burned alive or shot full of holes, and many people in this nation would consider that justice had been well served. We would be reading Ruby Ridge type news articles about the dangerously psychotic Tea Bag fugitives cornered in a David Koresh style retreat while an army of FBI, ATF, IRS, NSA and other alphabet soup agencies of this “representative republic” descended on them, eventually burned the place to cinders and slaughtered all the witnesses. The “details” would be craftily molded to fit the official story by a news media carefully guarded, and kept out of harm’s way, five miles down the road. The real facts would remain classified for the next hundred years by a government where neither major political party desires it’s citizens have the slightest hint concerning how outrageously oppressive and dangerous their elected officials and convoluted laws have become or how willing they are to use violent force to ensure compliance.

The current bunch now referred to in the liberal dominated American press as the “Tea Party” is far from being even remotely close to the Sons of Liberty that came into existence in 1765. For the most part, they have already been usurped by the Republican Party, and despite the strong rhetoric they still believe that the American system of government can and should be fixed from within the system. Many of them are outraged by what they see going on in Washington D.C. today, but fail to see the natural progression of what can on be the systematic, premeditated destruction of the personal rights of man recognized by that document we call the Bill of Rights. Even less see that that there is a difference between what the founding fathers recognized as being inalienable and the opposing idea that government granted those rights to the American people, and therefore, can alter those rights by reinterpretation, abrogation, or even abolish them altogether should they deem it prudent to do so. Like the majority of American citizens, the meaning of the word “inalienable” is lost, misunderstood and subject to any alteration the current crop of elected “representatives” determine to be necessary for their own personal welfare and the security of their continued control. “We The People” have nothing to say in the matter. Sure, we can vote one or two treasonous bastards out of office, but the politicians we replace them with are substantially no different and potentially worse than what we got rid of. We merely replace one evil oppressor with another evil oppressor and the erosion of personal rights continues unabated because the system is essentially broken and completely dysfunctional.

How would you handle the situation if you bought a car and discovered that it would only travel in reverse? You take it back and the dealer gives you another that does the same thing. You change the transmission and it still will only travel in reverse, you strip out the engine, the transmission, take off the wheels, replace everything but the passenger side door and the thing will still only travel in reverse. You sell it and buy another, and it too will only travel in reverse. You look around and everybody else is going backwards down the road. Over time, many will just choose to adapt to the awkward situation, some will try repeatedly to fix the problem but their efforts will always be futile. After a while some people begin to notice that a select group of individuals have cars that operate properly. They speed up and down the highways going forward like they are supposed to do but you and your neighbors are stuck in reverse. Many explanations are given for the problem, they sound good, the news media explains the benefit of traveling backwards and quite a few individuals begin to defend traveling backwards through life. Eventually, it becomes simply another fact of our existence, the expected norm. Eventfully someone invents a new mode of travel that allows them to move forward rather than backwards. Society is shocked; some are outraged at the audacity of anyone who would dare to travel forward when the acceptable means of travel demands that all good and socially conscious men go backwards. Investigations are undertaken, the culprit is apprehended, his vehicle is seized, society demands justice be done to correct this obvious abnormality. If this sorry inventor resists apprehension, so much the better, he is perforated with holes by the authorities, his house, family and his invention are destroyed by a mysterious fire that he, more than likely, set himself and everything returns to normal. Justice is served and everyone is pleased. Life returns to ‘”Normal.”

Admittedly, the paragraph above is pretty absurd. It is a poor allegory but the best I can come up with on the fly.

Article 2 of the U.S. Bill of rights states, “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.” This brief statement has been one of the most hotly debated issues of the 20th century and continues to be under scrutiny as we get deeper into the 21st century. Like the rest of the Bill Of Rights, it must be recognized that the right to have and bear arms was recognized as an inalienable right of all men and not a mere “perk” granted by a benevolent government. The word “inalienable” is considered as being synonymous with “natural,” in the same way that breathing is considered natural. The word “Inalienable” was considered, by our founding fathers to be something that was granted at birth, or as it was often considered, a natural gift of the creator to all men created.” Like other inalienable rights, the term “inalienable” refers to something that is unassailable by the government of men. The government did not grant inalienable rights, it recognized them, and stated by the use of the term “inalienable” that no government had the right, capacity or authority to alter, abrogate or abolish that which was granted to all men at birth by their creator. And yet, like the rest of our inalienable rights, the right to bear arms has been modified, abrogated, denied and trampled upon by our government. The Bill of Rights as a document, deals with individual rights as opposed to collective rights and it was authored by men who, because of good and justifiable reason and personal experience, understood that all forms of government naturally evolve into oppressive tyrannies if they are not carefully controlled by a vigilant population. Their recognition of the inalienable right of all men to have and bear arms was recognition of man’s natural state of freedom and the desire to maintain that freedom by use of arms if necessary against the intervention and obstruction of others who would force their will upon them if they could do so. Free men can only remain free when they have the means to resist those who would enslave them, take their property against their will, force them to do what they do not want to do, and force them to live under oppressive and unreasonable rules and laws created for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many.

The first step on the road to tyranny is to gain control over the people’s ability to resist. When the people have no means to resist the incursions of government interference in their daily lives and the government agents are able to enforce their unreasonable rules with the force of arms and threat of violence, tyranny exists. The U.S. government’s ability to abrogate the 2nd amendment was slow to come about and the first restrictions on gun ownership came about as a result of blatant bigotry. Individual states began to pass laws requiring permits to purchase handguns shortly after the end of the Civil War. Any white man could easily get a permit to purchase a certain firearms. Two signatures on a simple form and the firearm became his. This included all handguns, machine guns, silencers and even weapons that were considered strictly for military use, from heavy tripod mounted machine guns to field artillery. However, in many areas of the country where these laws were passed, black people had a very difficult time getting the forms signed, and for them, the private ownership of firearms was denied due to this formality. Essentially, the authorities in control did not want the blacks to have the means to resist oppression. This remained pretty much the status quo until 1934 when the government passed the first National Firearms Act.

The ridiculous experimental denial of alcoholic beverages to common folks in the U.S. that became know as Prohibition was a law that was popularly ignored by many. The criminals that supplied the alcohol defended themselves with firearms that were easily attainable at the time. Machine guns and hand grenades could be purchased easily. Gun stores and mail order suppliers offered every type of weapon imaginable. Prohibition ended in the U.S. in 1933 but the memories of machine gun battles between the gangsters and law enforcement remained fresh in the minds of many and the government acted on that fear by passing the first National Firearms Act of 1934 to regulate what were considered “gangster weapons” such as machine guns and hand grenades. The prohibition also included sawed off shotguns, Short barreled rifles, suppressors or silencers, all types of grenades, bombs, explosive missiles, poison gas weapons and essentially any sort of firearm that was not strictly for sporting use, however, due to the fear of inciting public outrage regarding the 2nd Amendment, most non-automatic handguns and pistols remained unregulated. With the repeal of the Volstead Act in 1933, the enforcement of the new firearms law was handed off to the suddenly idle revenuers in the Bureau of Internal Revenue, which in the 1950s became the Internal Revenue Service and the idle revenuers became known as the ATTD (Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division). Private Citizens could still own machine guns and other regulated weapons as long as they jumped through the appropriate hoops and paid a $200 tax to the government every time the ownership of the weapon changed hands.

In 1968 Richard Nixon, the Republican US President signed into law the 1968 Gun Control Act. While this law essentially focused on regulating the interstate commerce of firearms, it required the registration of all firearms sold in the U.S., prohibited the direct mail order of firearms by consumers and even prohibited the private sale of a firearm between two individuals in different states without the intervention of a federally licensed firearms dealer. In 1973 Nixon issued an executive order creating a separate Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms within the Treasury Department. Basically it was just another move towards the goal of completely eradicating the 2nd amendment right that allowed private citizens to own firearms for their self defense. The Brady Act signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 30, 1993, required background checks be conducted on individuals before a firearm could be purchased from a federally licensed dealer. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 prohibited the sale and ownership of what the U.S. government refers to as assault weapons. According to the government an “assault weapon” is any firearm that was designed for military use, has select fire capabilities, can be fitted with an extended magazine, is fitted with a bayonet lug or appears to be very scary in a general manner. As far as definitions are concerned it is less than precise and could include quite a lot of firearms. In California buying a firearm is a long drown out process, requiring background checks and waiting periods. Legislation in California has been proposed to force ammunition manufacturers to put serial numbers on each cartridge they make and the federal government is leaning towards stricter regulation of ammunition as a way to control firearms and ultimately to eliminate private firearm ownership. It has been a long but steady process but there is a reason for it, and anyone who thinks that reason is public safety is a fool. The simple fact of the matter (at least as far as politicians are concerned) is that government oppression is dangerous and difficult when common citizens own firearms.

What most politicians don’t seem to understand is that anyone who can securely plug one end of a piece of pipe and drill a small hole in it can create an crude but effective firearm. It is not a difficult task. Suitable propellants can be made from millions of commonly accessible substances such as match heads, finely powdered aluminum, dirt from abandoned stockyards or a simple hand pump and a decent airtight container. In the 1700s the Austrian Army had an entire regiment armed with .44 caliber repeating air rifles which they used with deadly effectiveness against Napoleon’s army. The European nobility killed wild large game animals using large bore pneumatic guns of amazing power and accuracy. Large bore air guns can be just as deadly and powerful as many firearms, and the manufacture of a rapid fire automatic air gun is really not much of a challenge. Effective, reliable and fairly accurate firearms are not much more difficult to construct. A decent set of plans, a hacksaw, half dozen files, access to an average junkyard full of scrap metal and patience is all that is required. The mountain people of Afghanistan and other third world countries have been manufacturing reliable firearms using simple hand tools and their feet as a vise for centuries. The prohibition of firearms is the corrupt politicians dream come true, but it is an achievement that would be impossible to enforce. As long as a half-wit with a hand-full of basic tools can eventually carve out the twenty some parts from steel tubes and other shapes to make a truly expedient and fully effective machine gun, then all the firearm’s control laws and legislation the U.S. Congress has passed and will continue to pass until all manufactured weapons are strictly illegal, mean little or nothing whatsoever, and free people will always have the means to secure their liberty from those elitist rulers who would oppress them. Objects and substances can be prohibited but those who would resist despots and tyrants have historically demonstrated the futility of oppressing those who would be free. Resistance fighters can turn anything into a suitable weapon if given the slightest chance to do so.

While there are many individuals who view themselves as members of the politically outcast group now called the “Tea Party” few among them have the capacity and willingness to honestly visualize the true loss of freedom and liberty that all American citizens have suffered. The United States of America has become a nation of fearful timid creatures filled with the guilt and remorse of imagined crimes, patiently waiting for their masters in high government offices to affect the necessary cures that will make it all better again. The promises of resolution and repair are hollow and meaningless and the path that is followed in hysterical panic leads us away from one invented crisis after another as we move farther from home and deeper into the dark jungle of despotism amidst the tangled mesh of tyranny. It is a rare individual who stops running in fear, hones a blade true and sharp and begins chopping away at the dense interwoven tangle of overgrowth while those around him continue their panic stricken dash to the illusion of safety. Those who created the problem will not lead us to safety; that has never been their plan, or their intention. The path they direct us to take leads to their glory and our demise. The choice we are faced with is now and always has been ours alone to choose; we follow, we lead, or we strike off on our own, create our own path and our own destiny.

I am not encouraging any individual or group to take seditious action against the American government. What I am saying here is that the American people have always been a hearty, curious lot who tended to take their independence very seriously. They set the course they traveled through life and suffered the consequences of their own actions because independent minds are never truly independent unless they can accept full responsibility for everything they do. Historically, these were the brave souls that cut new trails into the unknown wilderness that others then followed to the destiny that awaited them. They braved the unknown, seized every moment life presented, enjoyed the essence of liberty, and while many died alone and isolated, far from those they left behind, their efforts altered the destiny of men and changed the course of history. The legacy they left behind lived far longer than their forgotten names.
The timid, the shy and the fearful remained behind, unwilling to venture far from the safety of others like them. They lived out their lives in relative obscurity, enjoyed what happiness they could find in the world they chose to be a part of and passed from this life with the same degree of anonymity they exercised in life and their memories faded into the seas of time.

Around 1552, Étienne de La Boétie, an obscure Frenchman with a gift for astonishing insight observed that the tyranny of government is founded on the population’s acquiescing to positions of servitude. Even the most oppressive and tyrannical government is dependent on the support of its population, and popular support is the single, most evident characteristic of an enduring government. When a population recognizes that freedom and liberty are the natural state of all mankind and consciously chooses to withdraw their willing acceptance of servitude to tyrants, the chains of oppression and suffering imposed by tyrannical rulers quickly dissipate. When free men withdraw their consent to remain obedient to their oppressors, tyrants immediately lose the power to control and the great convoluted mechanism of exceedingly complex laws and regulations, the substance that forms the shackles of our servitude to an unjust government instantly dissolve and we find ourselves once again in the natural state where all men are equal and capable of fulfilling their own true destiny. We choose to submit or we chose to not submit but ultimately, the choice is ours to make. Servitude to others or individual freedom is a personal choice that each human being has the capacity to make.

We can let others make the hard decisions for us and follow blindly while those eager for power direct our feet on the path they choose for us and the society of similarly bound men and women approve will nod with approval as we tumble over the edge into the hardship and ruin that is the true fate of all who embrace slavery for the sake of security. The coward’s path is an easy choice while the path to freedom and liberty are fraught with danger and tumultuous chaos. Each hill ascended holds new mystery and greater possibility than the one before. The path through unknown territory is rarely clear, potential danger lurks every where, the courage and bravery required must be mined from within where the human heart guides the direction we follow. The reward of freedom is only granted to those who follow the path of liberty.

Two hundred years following the death of Étienne de La Boétie, David Hume, a Scottish philosopher, economist, historian observed, “Nothing appears more surprising to those who consider human affairs with a philosophical eye, than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few; and the implicit submission, with which men resign their own sentiments and passions to those of their rulers. When we enquire by what means this wonder is effected, we shall find, that, as Force is always on the side of the governed, the governors have nothing to support them but opinion. It is therefore, on opinion only that government is founded; and this maxim extends to the most despotic and military governments, as well as to the most free and most popular.”

The “Tea Party” is not a political party, though it may become entirely absorbed by the Republican leadership who would willingly absorb it and use it for their own advancement and the continuation of the corrupt government practices that will inevitably continue to erode the freedom of all American people. However, whether or not the “Tea Party” someday becomes a separate political force unto itself and thereby becomes part of the problem, or it is absorbed by a stronger group and merely exacerbates the existing problem is fundamentally inconsequential.

The seed of creation that gave birth to the idea that became the “Tea Party” is a symptom of a growing disease within the American government. It is an indication that the bounds of public tolerance are gradually being stressed to the point of breaking and some are even now beginning to see that the government that created the problems we face is the sole beneficiary of those problems continued existence. The problems they seek to solve, like the never ending stream of crisis situations thrown out for display are mere distractions meant to divert the attention while the mud that binds us dies to rock and their ability to control becomes greater still.

The seed of creation that gave birth to the idea that took root in the “Tea Party” is simple proof that freedom in America is still a possibility, that individual American citizens can step outside the carefully delineated boundaries of what is expected, they can cast aside the myth that true change is only possible from within the system, because it is all too apparent that the system is so riddled with corruption that true change is impossible to achieve. Reversing the erosion of personal liberty, inalienable rights and renewing the promise that all men are created equal and capable of prospering each according to his or her ability is a task that requires the true sense of freedom that our government masters have worked diligently to destroy with many slow and cautious steps. They system they have built serves us not, and our path to the future, a future of freedom and true prosperity is dependent on our ability to see the truth, seize the opportunity to step around the illusory obstacles of political necessity, slash our way free of the clinging vines of unjust laws created by self serving despots, and strike out bravely on the path to the unknown future before us.

Technorati Tags

freedom, liberty, opression, tyranny

digg this | del.icio.us

With the American economy spiraling out of control despite Obama’s $9 trillion dollar investment and his delusional intention of pumping even more non-existent, counterfeit U.S. tax money into the small business sector in the near future, it is rapidly becoming evident that, despite the extreme level of spending accompanied by the outrageous growth of a federal deficit that generations of future Americans will be stuck with, the current leadership of the United States government does not know how to fix the problem and everything they are doing is making it worse, not just for the American people of today but for generations to come.

The Democratic National Party, currently controlling all three branches of the American government, is becoming increasingly frantic in their effort to curtail the constantly growing unemployment rate across the nation before the mid-term elections in 2010. The primary reasoning behind their concern stems from their own initiation of the delusional belief that the federal government has the ability to create jobs in private sector businesses. This misguided belief served them well in the campaign season leading up to the creation of the 111th U.S. Congress where they used it successfully to foster the belief that the actions of the Republican President and Congressional representatives had done nothing to relieve the unemployment rate. However, since the inception of the 111th U.S. Congress, the election of Barack Obama, and the Democratic Party’s full control of the American government, the unemployment rate across the nation has sky rocketed to new heights.

The average unemployment rate across the U.S. today is nearly 9.5%. In California, the September unemployment rate averaged 12.2% and some California cities recorded unemployment rates above 25%. Rhode Island’s September average unemployment rate was at 13%, Nevada recorded and average unemployment rate in September of 13.3%, Michigan’s September average unemployment rate was at 15.3%, Oregon, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee and the District of Columbia all had average unemployment rates well above 10% in September, and since then the number have increased and there is no compelling reason to justify any belief that they will soon change their upward progression.

Millions of American citizens are unemployed and millions more are facing the likelihood of impending layoffs in the near future. Home foreclosures on the rise, bankruptcies are increasing, banks closures are becoming so commonplace that they are not even being reported anymore, and the American middle-class citizens are facing financial disaster as more and more of them are forced to make decisions between putting food on the table for their kids or paying their monthly credit card debts that never seem to go down because the finance companies have raised their interest rates to 28% or greater and virtually nothing paid goes to lower the principal because it is all sucked up by the ever increasing interest rates. For the most part these are employable American citizens, people with high school diplomas and normally much needed job skills as well as college graduates with degrees in engineering, computer science, law, and business management. Every job opportunity published is responded to by thousands of over-qualified, well-experienced applicants and people who formerly held jobs paying $176,000 per year consider themselves lucky to now get a position of minor importance paying below $30,000 annually. The companies that are hiring are overjoyed by the long lists of highly qualified applicants because five years ago they couldn’t find enough qualified help and now they are inundated with long lists of over-qualified applicants to choose from. Five years ago the same applicants wouldn’t get out of bed to go to work for the wages they now eagerly seek.

For many of the American middle-class citizens, even these scant opportunities have yet to materialize. For most of these families, their income was derived from well-paying blue-collar jobs demanding specific skill sets such as welders, electricians, carpenters, plumbers, masons, steel fabricators, machinists, mechanics and the vast majority of construction industry occupations. While many of these jobs still exist today, the fact of the matter is that more than 85% of these positions are filled with low-paid, under qualified, illegal aliens while the well-qualified American workers who formerly did this work are now sitting at home collecting unemployment checks and trying to make two impossible ends meet.

While the federal government is directly to blame for this problem, it is a situation that both the Republicans and the Democrats have had a hand in creating. Republican administrations have ignored the increasing population of illegal aliens because they provided a cheap source of labor and businesses prospered as a result. The Democratic Party has always taken full advantage of their ability to organize minority special interests and they view illegal aliens as potential future supporters and have made numerous promises to Hispanic community advocacy groups to gain their support for candidates during election campaigns. As a result, the Democratic Party is extremely resistant to disenfranchise their Hispanic supporters by enforcing immigration laws that will adversely affect the population of illegal aliens of whom more than 80% come from Mexico. Furthermore, the Democratic Party has exacerbated the influx of illegal aliens by promising the Hispanic Advocacy groups increased entitlements, additional political influence, and amnesty for all 40 million illegal aliens now in the US as will as an increase in the number of Mexican Nationals allowed to enter the US every year in the future.

The idea that the President of the United States can create jobs is a myth, and every presidential candidate that has ever said that he would create jobs for the American people has intentionally lied for the sole purpose of creating false hope and winning votes. The United States Congress cannot create jobs and when they stand up and say that if we support this legislation or that legislation jobs will be created they too are intentionally lying. The United States government simply does not have the means to create jobs because the United States government is not a business and businesses create jobs. In a healthy and prosperous economy there are more jobs than workers to fill them. In a weak economy, businesses must cut back to survive and there are fewer jobs and higher unemployment.

The Republican Party gained the support of business by ignoring border enforcement and allowing illegal aliens to enter the country where they could find employment formerly reserved for American citizens. The Democratic Party has wrapped their arms around the illegal aliens as future supporters while promising them amnesty and lucrative entitlement programs to provide them with housing, education and financial support at the expense of the American taxpayer. Meanwhile the American middle-class is falling into a state of poverty from which they cannot escape because their former positions of employment are now filled by illegal aliens and their tax burden is growing to pay for the government funded entitlement programs to illegal aliens and the struggling middle-class American citizens are being left to suffer the consequences of extremely adverse political actions taken by the elected representatives they misguidedly chose to put into office. Elected representatives, who are now working night and day with increased fervor and dedication to implement legislation that will seal the downfall of America’s middle-class forever and secure the Democratic Party’s full control of the entire American government for decades to come before the American people wake up to what is going on and certainly before those American citizens can alter the course of their own destiny by ridding themselves of Washington’s overabundance of future despots during the 2010 mid-term elections.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the economic situation in the United States will not improve in any significant manner between now and 2010. Unemployment will continue to escalate, taxes will continue to rise and the American middle-class will continue to suffer the consequences of their elected leader’s actions as they implement their nefarious agenda to the detriment of our nation. The successful implementation of this nation’s downfall, the eradication of liberty and the establishment of a Democratic Socialist government is entirely dependent on their ability to keep the American people divided into warring ideological partisan factions while distracting the attention of the populace with a never-ending stream of real and imagined crisis situations serving only as a smokescreen for their malicious legislation.

In 1776 the ragtag British colonists, three-quarters of whom were living in a state of temporary or perpetual slavery as indentured servants, were inspired by the vision that was larger and more powerful than any single individual could ever fathom, a vision so monumental that it would change the course of human history to the very end of time, a vision that would cast a blinding light of truth and hope into every darkened pit of ignorance, superstition, despotism and tyranny on the entire planet, a vision powerful enough to bring rich, poor, white, brown, black, Catholic, Protestant, agnostic and heathen together as one unified force, a vision of a new world, a world of freedom and liberty would rest on the firm shoulders of a unified people given to the belief that divine providence created them and endowed them from birth with the unalienable rights of equality, freedom and the opportunity to achieve all of the prosperity and happiness they could acquire through their own honest hard work and ingenuity, and finally a vision of a new world where tyrants and despots were guaranteed no foothold, leverage or influence from which they could launch their malicious undertakings because the rights of all men were established and endowed by their creator and the authority of this new world’s government rested firmly in the hands of the governed who would be forever vigilant against all attempted abridgements of their divinely ordained rights.

The vision that brought these diverse souls together for one common purpose is memorialized in the Great Seal of the United States of America bearing the motto “E Pluribus Unum” on the front side and “Novus Ordo Seclorum” on the obverse. “E Pluribus Unum” has been translated as meaning “many uniting into one” and more literally as “Out of Many, one.” “Novus Ordo Seclorum” has been translated by some to mean “New Order of the Ages,” and conspiracy nuts would have us believe that the proper translation is “New World Order,” because it fits better into their convoluted puzzle of questionable dots that never seem to line up as they say, however the motto was suggested in 1782 by Charles Thompson, an expert in Latin, who explained that the words “Novus Ordo Seclorum” which appear in context to the date MDCCLXXVI (the Latin numerals for 1776) directly above the phrase signifies the beginning of the new American Era, which commenced with the signing of the Declaration of Independence. To divert very briefly; the term “Annuit coeptis” that appears above the eye in the triangle on the obverse side of the Great Seal signifies the unassailable fact that when many put aside their differences and come together with a unified and common purpose to perform that which is natural and good for all, providence favors their effort. Literally translated “Annuit” means “to give the nod to” and “coeptis” means “undertakings,” the simple translation in the full context of the Great Seal is “Providence Favors Our Undertaking.”The eye in the triangle was originally suggested by Pierre Du Simitière, a consultant and artist who served on the first Great Seal committee appointed July 4, 1776. He referred to the symbol as “The Eye of Providence in a radiant Triangle.” The overall design of the first committee was not approved by Congress, but six years later the third committee suggested the use of Simitière’s symbol for the reverse side of the Great Seal. Charles Thomson, a member of the third committee liked the symbol and its position over the unfinished pyramid of thirteen steps signifying the thirteen colonies. Accordingly Charles Thomson explained the symbol of the eye in the pyramid as signifying the “interpositions of providence in favor of the American cause.” It was never alluded to as “the all seeing eye,” the eye of the Christian God“, or the “eye of Horus,” despite the claims of conspiracy fans. The artist who first created it and the individual who later adopted it into the final design ultimately accepted by the United States Congress clearly and unquestionably referred to it as the “Eye of Providence.”

To sum the whole thing up simply, the outnumbered, ill-equipped and wholly inexperienced population of European cast-offs, a population largely created by personae non gratis exported to the colonies by every “civilized” monarchy then existing as well as numerous individuals fleeing whatever genocidal religious persecution their particular ruling tyrant deemed appropriate in the eyes of God, rallied together for the purpose of achieving something that had never been attempted by such a diverse group in the entire history of mankind, the creation of a completely new nation that would be ruled by the consent of people who populated it. To the rest of the civilized world the entire concept appeared to be a venture in ludicrous insanity. The concept put forth by the colonists was not a Democracy as it existed in ancient Rome, it was an affiliation of thirteen individual and entirely sovereign colonies loosely aligned in a non-government the colonists referred to as a “Republic.” In the eyes of European statesmen, monarchs and tyrants the ideas of the colonists closely resembled the embodiment of anarchy and in turn, every stake holding former ruler plotted to recoup their lost investments (and then some) in the new world when chaos overtook the colonist’s futile exercise in a government run by the people.

Despite being outnumbered, ill-equipped and wholly inexperienced at the fine art of war, the colonists finally cornered the British troops and captured a good portion of the British Army in 1777. When the war began, the British maintained naval superiority over the colonists, the British Royal Navy had over 100 ships of the line and many frigates and smaller craft. During the first three years of the war, the Royal Navy was primarily used to transport troops for land operations and to protect commercial shipping. The American colonists had no ships of the line, and relied extensively on privateering to harass British shipping. 55,000 American sailors served aboard the fleet of privateers that numbered nearly 1700 during the war. Operating out of French channel ports these privateers caused significant embarrassment to the Royal Navy and inflamed Anglo-French relations as they captured or sank nearly 2,283 enemy ships. Emboldened by the Continental Army’s capture of British troops in 1777, France entered the war on behalf of the American colonists in 1778 along with their Spanish and Dutch allies.

The Continental Army suffered many defeats at the hands of the well-trained British Troops and Britain’s Hessian mercenaries but they persisted despite the odds. New York was under British control in 1776. Washington’s troops were defeated as the British General Howe moved into position to capture Philadelphia, the seat of the revolutionary government and Washington’s unsuccessful counter-attack against the British encampment in nearby Germantown in early October forced his retreat to Valley Forge where the cruel winter months decimated the Continental Army and 2,500 men died from disease and exposure. At times the future of the New World often appeared despairing bleak and at one point the entire Continental Army consisted of a mere 1400 poorly equipped volunteers, most of whom suffered from over exposure, malnutrition and disease, and yet at the height of what Thomas Paine described as the “times that try men’s souls,” General George Washington led his meager remaining troops across the Delaware on a bleak Christmas night, and with dedication of purpose and a faith in providence that bordered on insanity, he took the offensive. On December 26, 1776, the Continental Army captured nearly 1000 Hessian mercenaries at the Battle of Trenton. The British General Cornwallis quickly moved to retake Trenton but was outflanked by Washington’s troops who successfully attacked and overcame the British rearguard at Princeton on January 3, 1777. These victories gave the American cause the boost it sorely needed and prompted the New Jersey Militia to reengage the British and Hessian forces with uncharacteristically guerilla strategies involving opportunistic ambush and immediate withdrawal. A strategy the well disciplined British and Hessian troops were ill prepared to defend against and a strategy that ultimately forced the British to withdraw in retreat.

In 1777, the British General John Burgoyne led an expedition of 12,000 troops out of Quebec in a two pronged invasion designed to seize Lake Champlain and Hudson River corridor thereby isolating New England from the rest of the American colonies, meanwhile the second prong, led by Barry St. Leger consisted of 2000 troops who intended to move down the Mohawk River Valley and link up with Burgoyne in Albany, New York. Burgoyne successfully recaptured Fort Ticonderoga in early July, but his further advancement was slowed considerably by American militia who chopped down trees in his path and occasionally felling massive right into the center of his column. The frustrated Burgoyne dispatched a detachment of more than a 1,000 men under the leadership of Lieutenant Colonel Friedrich Baum and backed up by additional troops under Lieutenant Colonel Heinrich von Breymann to seize the supplies of the militia guerillas. The militia led this detachment on a merry chase to a point approximately 10 miles from Bennington, Vermont where they were net head on by a combined American force of 2,000 men, composed of the New Hampshire and Massachusetts militiamen, led by General John Stark, and reinforced by men led by Colonel Seth Warner and members of the Green Mountain Boys. Lieutenant Colonel Friedrich Baum’s troops were quickly enveloped by John Stark’s militiamen. In the ensuing battle Lieutenant Colonel Friedrich Baum was killed and three hundred British troops were killed and the remaining 700 were captured. Breymann’s detachment futilely attempted to reinforce Baum’s troops and was driven away after suffering a massive number of casualties. Burgoyne’s situation became desperate, he was reduced to less than 6,000 man and they were running short on supplies. He made a desperate attempt to reach Albany but was intercepted by an entrenched force of 8,000 American troops, commanded by the General Horatio Gates, 10 miles south of Saratoga, New York. Burgoyne attempted to outflank the entrenched Americans during the first battle of Saratoga. His only hope lay in reinforcements from General Howe’s Army stationed in New York, but unbeknownst to Burgoyne, Howe’s troops had sailed south away to capture Philadelphia. The American militia saw the first glimmer of hope in months and flocked to assist General Gates resulting in the second battle of Saratoga where the British received a well deserved beating and the British General John Burgoyne had no alternative but to raise the white flag of surrender on October 17, 1777. Despite the fact that the war was far from over, the surrender of Burgoyne was the turning point of the American Revolution.

By 1781, the northern, southern, and naval theaters of the Revolutionary war converged at Yorktown, Virginia. The British General Cornwallis had taken refuge in Yorktown where he awaited the arrival of the British fleet sent to enable his escape and the retreat of the British forces. However, the French naval forces under the leadership of the French General Marquis de Lafayette decimated the British fleet in the battle of the Chesapeake and General Cornwallis was effectively cornered with no means of escape. General Washington quickly dispatched the 17,000 French and American forces under his command in New York to Yorktown where they laid siege to the British fortifications during the first week of October. After several days of bombardment, General Cornwallis realized that his position was rapidly deteriorating and on October 17th, he dispatched a drummer followed by an officer waving a white handkerchief as his envoy to the besieging troops requesting the terms of his capitulation. Following two days of largely one-sided negotiations, General Cornwallis officially surrendered and 8,000 British troops, 214 artillery pieces, thousands of muskets, 24 transport ships, wagons and horses were captured.

Following the surrender of Cornwallis, Washington moved his army to New Windsor, New York where they remained stationed until the Treaty of Paris was signed on September 3, 1783, officially recognizing the United States of America as a free and sovereign nation and ending the Revolutionary war.

While the somewhat lengthy, the discussion of historical events above is relevant to this discussion because the American citizens are currently facing the loss of the very same vision that millions of brave Americans have given their lives to protect throughout the countless wars our nation has fought over the last 233 years. The threat we face today is far more subtle than the blatantly obvious threats of the past. The dark forces struggling to keep us divided and powerless are not foreign monarchs, genocidal Nazi storm troopers, insidious Japanese kamikaze pilots, or Communists hiding out in our closets and under our beds. The threat we face today, the dark force that would keep us divided and fighting amongst ourselves while they creep around behind our backs looting our treasury and destroying our unalienable rights is none other than the well dressed, carefully manicured smiling faces of the professional American politicians affiliated with the Democratic and the Republican Party. The very same politicians that have promised to represent the best interests of the citizens who elected them to office, who have conned the American people into believing that their accumulated many years of experience qualifies them above all others, lends great credibility to their abilities as suitable leaders for our nation and by some far stretch of the imagination, makes them more trustworthy and honest than any who oppose them. Incredibly enough, despite the ironic fact that the approval rating for this gaggle of American con artists, the perpetual inhabitants of the United States Congress, is so abysmally low that you would have to dig an extremely deep hole to find its true measure, we the people of the best educated nation on Earth continue to put our sacred trust in the same duplicitous, back-stabbing, and exceedingly corrupt professional liars and thieves in each and every election and every time we get the same exact results. Elected officials who don’t represent the people that voted for them, take more of your hard earned money every chance they get while doing less and less for the American people, while passing legislation to allow their biggest campaign contributors to get away with things that are certainly not in the best interests of the American people, the nation’s economy or national security.

How many among us believe that the political prostitutes, state or federal, Democrat, or Republican are wiser, smarter, more experienced, better educated and more qualified to serve than, for instance, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton or Benjamin Franklin? The registered hardcore Democrats and Republican of today would be surprised to learn that George Washington, the first President of the United States and a man that faithfully served this nation for its first eight tumultuous years steadfastly refused to become affiliated with any of the numerous political factions that developed while he was in office, and it is highly doubtful that he would affiliate himself with any political party now in existence.

Benjamin Franklin, one of the brightest minds of the era, philosopher, printer, scientist, inventor, satirist, civic activist, statesman, soldier, diplomat, and one of the five visionary men who drafted the Declaration of Independence, and a champion of American Independence second only to George Washington, embraced the concepts of Republicanism in their original sense, not according to the watered down political precepts of the so-called “Republican” Party we know today, but according to the original undiluted concept of a the term “Republicanism” as it embodied the belief that the one form of government best suited the New World was a limited form of government, stressing liberty and rights as its core values, making the people as a whole sovereign in their authority, entirely rejecting the idea of European Monarchy founded on the principle of inherited political power, and finally, a form of government that obligated the citizens to remain independent in the performance of civic duties and ever vigilant to the propensity for corruption inherent in all forms of government. Despite the significant role that Benjamin Franklin played in the formation of this nation’s original system of government and his belief in the philosophy of Republicanism, he, like George Washington, resisted the temptation of political affiliation because, like the other founding fathers of this nation he clearly recognized that the partisanship that quite naturally developed from opposing, fundamentally and radically different political viewpoints inevitably led to the corruption of the values so contingent to our pure and original form of government. The concepts of philosophical Republicanism as they are clearly expressed in the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and later, the Constitution of the United States of America assert the unalienable rights of the people, rights that are endowed in all at the time of their conception by divine providence, and unquestionably, rights that are not derived from the government itself and are thereby impervious to the oftentimes capricious whims of a majority subject to manipulation by partisan manipulation.

Regardless of what this once great and prosperous nation had become over the course of the last 300 years, it is vitally important to bear in mind that the “Founding Fathers,” men like George Washington, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and others envisioned a very limited form of government whose sole purpose for existence was the protection of the American citizens freedom and liberty and that the freedom and liberty of the American people was not derived from, or granted by, a form of government invested with the authority to alter, abridge or eliminate, in part or whole, the unalienable rights of men that was the essence of their freedom and established their liberty. Their belief was clearly established and simply stated in the Declaration of Independence with the words, “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.” As a side note it should be pointed out that this statement is not all-inclusive, in other words, this was not meant to be a comprehensive list of all unalienable rights, merely a representation of some of those rights for the purpose of explanation. The use of the term “unalienable” in the context of the words “endowed by their creator” clearly demonstrates the clarity of the idea those men expressed. “Unalienable rights” are to be considered “natural” in the same sense that a man is born with tow eyes and two legs, he is also born with the right of freedom, the desire for liberty and as an equal to all others. The concept of “Government” is excluded from that which is “endowed by their creator.” Government has no more authority over the natural gifts granted to man by divine providence than it has over the changing of seasons. A Government by any definition of the term can exercise no power to grant or deny that which is naturally created as an integral part of all men. This concept was not unique by any means and our founding fathers were these the first men to believe as they did; Section 10, Verse 9 of the Chapter of Mark in the Christian Bible states, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” To express it in its simplest terms, the men that founded this nation’s original form of government shared the common belief that the rights of man are endowed at birth to all men equally by divine providence, furthermore, they firmly believed that any attempt to regulate, abridge or deny the natural rights of men was an act of arrogant tyranny.

The people of the United States of America, now 233 years after the formation of our “limited” government, bear the burden of an estimated 16 million government employees, and there is not one “unalienable right” that has escaped being “re-defined,” abridged, regulated in some form or another, or outright denied in the last two and nearly one-half centuries of political maneuvering that has brought us to this point in time.

It is difficult to imagine how the founding fathers would view the transformation of the government they created more than two centuries ago, because what we have today is far removed form from what they envisioned so many years ago. They would be stunned speechless and probably hide their heads in shame to discover that the government they brought into existence now takes, under the threat of force, more than half of what the American people earn in wages, that the vast majority of legislation passed by the U.S. Congress is bought and paid with “contributions” by wealthy corporations, minority special interest groups, labor unions and lobbying firms, furthermore these same wealthy corporations, minority special interest groups, labor unions and lobbying firms pour billions of dollars into the partisan struggle for domination that we now call “Elections,” and that practically none, if any of the legislation passed by the U.S. Congress provides anything even remotely beneficial to the people of this nation, or that the professional politicians now running this nation make more money as a result of serving one term in office than 95% of the American people earn in a lifetime and some of those politicians have been in office for more than two decades, or that the public debt now owed to foreign governments is so astronomical that future generations of American citizens will live lives of indentured servitude as they struggle to pay for their government’s capricious spending. Is there anyone out there who actually believes that America is governed under the same principles established by our founding fathers, and that, if alive today, they would not spit in the eye of what we have allowed this nation to become?

We the American people are standing on the edge of complete ruin. Our political representatives, Democrats and Republicans alike, have sold us down the proverbial river and we and our future generations are facing lives of financial servitude to a government whose officials have taken the authority we gave them and used that authority to borrow money from foreign nations to pay for entitlement programs created for the sole purpose of winning future elections. In the process these elected representatives that we put into office have divided the nation into those who benefit from their programs and those who pay for the debts created by borrowing the funds to create them. The entire system is so riddled with the maggots of authoritarian elitists, and convoluted legislation that has created multiple levels of laws and loopholes in the effort to ensure that their white-knuckled grasp on the control of our government is never relinquished that it is virtually impossible to reverse the damage from within the system using the socially acceptable tools provided. We have been lied to, conned, and shanghaied into believing that the same political representatives that led us to our currently deplorable state of ruin are somehow capable of leading us away from the devastation they have wrought, and if we continue to place our trust in the professional liars and con artists of the Democratic and Republican Parties, as we have in the past, then we are blindly stupid fools who deserve to suffer the fate that will soon befall us. The time for true reform slipped by before most of us were even born and that time is a long way behind us, down many forgotten roads. The time to call for reform was back before our two primary political parties, the Democrats and Republicans, began their struggle with each other for full control of a government that never belonged to them in the first place, back before the Republicans began selling us out to the large corporations and industrial concerns for bigger campaign donations, and back before the Democrats started selling us out to every imaginable labor organization and minority group that could dream itself into existence by exchanging votes for entitlement programs and promises to pass laws that are blatant violations of our constitution. Our great-great grandparents didn’t stop it, our great grandparents didn’t stop it, our grandparents didn’t stop it, our parents didn’t stop it and now we are standing here, the dark abyss of doom before us, and despite all those previous generations calling to us to go forth to our ruin, we know in our hearts and in our minds that taking that last step will be the biggest mistake we have ever made. There is no power on Earth that can force us to take that step if we choose to resist. We are the people of the United States of America and the American government belongs to us, not to the Democrats and not to the Republicans, we the people are the power that gives the American government every ounce of power and authority it wields, and we can take that power and authority away from the political elitists of this nation who are, even now, directing us to our destruction, simply by standing together as one and resisting. The choices are simple and limited, we can continue because we are too timid to do anything but follow, like one sheep follows the next into the slaughterhouse, and embrace our future as economic slaves to the political tyrants we created, or we can stop here at the edge of our desolation and refuse to go any further. The choice is ours to make. The political tyrants that have led us to this point are only as powerful as we allow them to be. That is the lesson our founding fathers taught us when they wrote the words “United We Stand.”

Technorati Tags

Revolution, illegal aliens, amnesty,freedom, liberty, special interest, unemployment, bankruptcy, home foreclosures, foreclosures, taxes, Republican Party, Democratic Party

digg this | del.icio.us

I remember when I was in junior high school, I had conned and cajoled my way out of a kid’s judo class and into an adults Ju-jitsu class where neither the serious Japanese sensei nor the equally serious adult students cut me any slack at all. I spent most of my first two years being kicked, choked and bodily thrown from one end of the dojo to the other by my instructor and fellow students in their many futile attempts to convince me of the error of premature advancement. At the conclusion of each Tuesday and Thursday lesson, bruised, beaten, bleeding and sweating like a pig going through menopause, I would scamper out of that building and run like the dickens to my parent’s house about a mile and a half through the crime-ridden streets of Compton where my two older brothers would be laughing their ugly butts off watching Soupy Sales on our ancient 800 pound maple paneled television set. The Soupy Sales Show started at the same instant that our entire class lined up for the final bow before our diminutive, but dangerous instructor. With rare exception, I made that run in less than eight minutes. Normally, I would drag my beaten ass through the front door five or six minutes before the mid-show commercial break and sit for a full fifteen or twenty minutes in the glow of that massive glowing screen, panting, sweating and laughing my fool head off at the silly antics of the only television show that I considered worth watching during my short lived youth. The stupid jokes, the bodiless puppets White Fang and Black Tooth, endless pie throwing and insane peels of laughter pouring from my mouth and the mouths of my two older brothers (sadistical bastards, the both of them) always seemed to erase the pain of my multiple injuries and over-stretched muscles. It leeched the soreness from my bones, faded my bruises, and eradicated the painful memories of that day’s tortures inflicted by much older and larger men who were unanimous in their contempt for my presence. Nearly forty-eight years after the fact, I can look back at those days with the clarity of hindsight and understand that the television history’s most silly comedian somehow made each days suffering much easier to take. I continued those classes, swallowed each painful lesson with joy as it came to me, and eventfully I began to learn. Those classes lasted about as long as Soupy’s show. Despite the pain I suffered throughout, I stoically persevered, and by the time the city park’s department cut them from its budget, and the Soupy Sales Show was replaced by some mind numbing show about teenage hippies turned cops, I was dishing out more pain and humiliation to my older classmates than they were inflicting on me and I had even managed to earn the reluctant respect of the almond-eyed gentleman before we last bowed to one another and our paths parted forever. Persistence is one characteristic I seem to have in abundance and it has usually served me well.

This morning’s news paper brought a strange sense of loss to me with the news that the great Soupy Sales has died at the age of 86 years. The news of his death brought a flood of memories racing back through my mind.

The early 1960s when “The Soupy Sales Show” first appeared on our limited local television stations were such a strange period in time. America was launching rocket ships into space and talking about going to the moon, Adolf Eichmann, a long missing Nazi war criminal was snatched out of South America and hung by his scrawny neck in Israel. Marilyn Monroe died from an overdose of drugs, booze and life, Spider-Man appeared out of nowhere and I learned the hard way about the questionable strength of thin fiber ropes as I fell from the gigantic elm tree in our front yard. The stand-off between the United States and the Soviet Union near the island of Cuba threatened the world with nuclear war and struck real fear into the hearts and minds of everyone. I remember the tears that welled up in the fearful eyes of my junior high-school classmates as this situation was discussed in our history classes and American kids all across this nation believed that a nuclear war was unavoidable and Armageddon was upon us. An English pop group called the “Beatles” began to dominate the local radio shows and I hated their music, but I fell held over heels in unrequited love with the daughter of a Mormon Bishop, a comely lass who refused to acknowledge my existence till I eventually wore her down two years later. Buddhist monks began setting fire to themselves in a distant country called Vietnam, and an amazing train robbery in England raises strange personal feelings of deep admiration for the ingenious thieves. Little transistor radios and electronic calculators the size of a paper-back book were being sold in a new store called Sav-On’s for over a fifty bucks each. The Civil Rights movement in the U.S. gained ground and I realized for the first time in my life that, unlike the dominant population of my hometown, I was a white boy. On one sunny day in November our fifth-period classes were interrupted with an intercom announcement by the school principal that President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas, Texas, and later, as I sat on the cinder block wall outside the school where nobody could see me, I softly cried for the death of the first American president that I had actually seen with my own eyes; rooted for during the Democratic Convention held in Los Angeles, and admired for his brave actions during World War II, his personal integrity as America’s 35th President, and the pain his family must have felt at the time of his death.

Amidst those strange, sad and amazing times, as our nation grew closer and closer to becoming more deeply involved in the politics of South-East Asia and I lost my virginity to Rudi Stolt’s beautiful red-headed sister in the privacy afforded by her family’s backyard bomb shelter, and all through this strange period of time I was getting my butt kicked twice weekly by an odd assortment of adults, twice my size and three times my age, while Soupy Sales remained a constant and never-ending source of hilarity.

Soupy died at 86 years of age; he had experienced a decent, if short, television career, brought about gales of laughter across the entire nation, and permanently inspired a legion of impressionable youth to take few things seriously and laugh easily at anything that struck us as being even remotely funny. Singlehandedly, he seriously retarded an entire generation’s ability to pay respectful homage to the matter of fact concepts expressed by our parents, and whether, he knew it or not, intentionally or unintentionally, that one extremely funny character instilled a solid sense of humor in millions of American kids at a point in American history where humor was desperately needed and universally despised by the rapidly dwindling horde of parental Puritans wringing their hands in anxiety over the future of a nation run by obvious idiots with a demonstrated propensity for food fights in school cafeterias, shouting aah-raw, aah-raw, as they flung mashed potatoes and cod cakes in every direction. Soupy Sales was more than a television comedian, he was an inspiration and a devastating force of nature whose delightfully silly antics inspired countless acts of entirely surprising, spontaneous insanity among normally well-behaved American children. It was a change that was as much needed as it was hated by our elders. Soupy Sales did the world a favor, and if there was any true justice, the transformation he wrought would be acknowledged as being a true, honest to God miracle from beyond the veil of possibility, considering the dire nature of entirely devastating and threatening events going on everywhere during those times, and the man would be canonized as a true saint. Saint Soupy, the patron saint of spontaneous eruptions of completely inappropriate hilarity in dire times.

Alas, Soupy Sales is now dead, and I am sorry to see him gone, because if there was ever a time when laughter was most needed, it is now. One look across the spectrum of this nation’s diverse populace supplies ample reason to justify the belief that, as a group, America’s sense of humor has become seriously hindered. The corrupt shenanigans of Washington DC’s professional politicians have sapped our sense of humor with the efficiency of ravenous vampires draining the blood from some innocent late night victim. The dour faces we pass everyday in our wanderings have a serious set to them and the feeling of anxiety is thick enough to slice and substantial enough to butter. Political manipulators using carefully collected data and clever computer programs have developed and fine tuned their ability to calculate and predict everything we think and every action we will take. The smug arrogance they so publicly exhibit is the result knowing that our actions are entirely predictable, our every move tracked and tabulated and all future action is fully expected by those who push the buttons, pull the strings and are never surprised by the expected results they always get. Like autonomons, the ancient mechanistic forerunners of today’s robots, our controllers have complete faith in their ability to push button “F” for an expected result and pull string # 252 for the installation of tomorrow’s new found fear. The predictability of our behavior has given them the power to control and has destroyed the true essence of human liberty we once enjoyed. The American populace needs a huge dose of Saint Soupy’s spontaneity to resist the gravitational pull towards complete predictability and enslavement. Spontaneity is the virus of all government systems of predictive analysis. Spontaneity breeds chaos, and chaos is a self-replicating creature in any orderly system characterized by the effort to establish predictability. Soupy Sales, when we need him the most is dead and soon to be buried. There is no Spider-Man coming to save us all from the evil minions of the scowling faced power mongers pushing our buttons and pulling our strings, but buried deep within the internal confines of some individuals there rests a powerful force that can save the planet from the eternal doldrums of world domination by self-serving bores and authoritarian sour-pusses. Those individuals must invoke the power of Saint Soupy, discover their hidden funny bone, and wreck havoc on predictability by unleashing their natural ability to spread the infection of spontaneously inappropriate hilarity everywhere. Spontaneously inappropriate hilarity is the deadliest weapon ever devised in the fight against tyranny. Spontaneity is the embodiment of true liberty and hilarity is the best vaccination against Socialism ever devised.

Release the Whoopi cushions of chaos and destroy the authoritarian mudshark’s administration with weapons of mass hilarity.

Technorati Tags

Soupy Sales

digg this | del.icio.us

Even the blabbering American News Media doesn’t seem to be able to get a decent handle on why Barack Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize. Some have speculated that the award was meant to inspire him to loftier accomplishments and others have suggested that it was awarded to him for the hopeful purpose of reversing his rapidly dwindling support among the American people. Neither version carries much credibility and some of Obama’s most stalwart supporters in the American news media have come dangerously close to admitting that Obama has accomplished nothing of any true merit since he entered office and that most of his campaign promises have fallen by the wayside, progress on his self-proclaimed more important agenda items have slowed to a crawl or stopped completely, and most of what he has done has made the nation’s problems worse than they were before he entered office. He has increased the $1.3 trillion dollar national debt he inherited from George W. Bush to a whopping $12 trillion dollars and initiated plans that could double that figure before the end of his second year in office.

As the Commander in Chief he has lost what little trust he ever had with most of the United States Military officers, enlisted personnel and Pentagon officials and has ordered military commanders in charge of troops stationed in extremely hostile combat zones to implement “rules of engagement” that prohibit their ability to defend themselves even when our brave young troops are under direct attack by enemy forces and American soldiers are being killed. He has directed entire American defense systems be dismantled and carted off to the scrap pile and refused to allocate funds for building the advanced replacement defense systems that the American government has already spent billions of American tax dollars designing and engineering, and our nation has never been more defenseless or vulnerable to attack than it is today.

As the chief administrator of the nation, Obama has intentionally taken steps to ensure that the American tax payers will be indebted to the foreign financers he has borrowed trillions of dollars from for a minimum of fifty years into the future. Asian and European financers now own more of our nation than the combined population of American citizens and the entire U.S. Government and the American economy has become entirely dependent on the questionable good will of foreign interests who can call our debts to them due at any time. We no longer have to worry about being invaded by foreign military because thanks to Obama, they already own most of the country and they can legally claim their property at any time. The money handed out to American banks, finance companies and insurance companies came from foreign interests who now underwrite their activities and the mortgage on your home might have the name of an American finance company across the top but the ultimate owner of that debt is more than likely the Chinese government who financed Obama’s economic stimulus disaster.

The Democratic National Party has taken to calling anybody who dares to criticize Barack Obama’s Marxist agenda right wing extremists and racists, and of the Republican elected representatives who publicly condemned his selection as the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, the DNC spokesman, Brad Woodhouse, outrageously claimed “the Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists, the Taliban and Hamas this morning, in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.” Obviously the DNC can’t come up with one good reason why Obama would be given that prize so they’ve resorted to demonizing the critics by claiming that they are allied with terrorists. While the statement may have been a simple knee-jerk reaction shooting out of Woodhouse’s mouth before his brain kicked into gear, the fact of the matter is that it’s downright stupid, and unfortunately, stupid statements of this nature are increasingly becoming more characteristic of liberal politicians who lack real answers to honest questions. I don’t know any truly logical and intelligent registered Democrats, but if there is such a thing, I doubt that they would find Woodhouse’s statement very satisfying.

Please, bear in mind that I am not blindly rushing to the support of the Republican Party in this matter even though I believe their criticism is justified. The Republican Party, generally speaking, have proven that they are no more interested in serving the best interests of the American people than the Democrats have of late. The Democrats and the Republicans have both demonstrated a global agenda and both have demonstrated a strong propensity to increase the size and scope of government control and the ultimate goal of both political parties is less freedom and liberty for the American people and more tyrannical authority for government.

The actions of both primary political parties aptly demonstrate the simple truth that neither is as interested in providing the American citizens with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as they are in consolidating their particular group’s power to control the destiny of a system of government that has evolved from “by the people and for the people” into a monstrous perversity that serves the highest bidder while the American people suffer the consequences of clever political manipulators who create one crisis after another and then offer solutions that further erode our few remaining constitutional rights, increases the size and authority of government, decreases the prosperity of the American people and strengthens the bonds of government servitude that have been forced upon us.

SOME BACKGROUND ON THE NOBEL PRIZES
The Nobel Peace Prize is one of the five Nobel Prizes handed out yearly by a foundation initiated and funded through the will and estate of the Swedish industrialist and inventor Alfred Nobel. Alfred Nobel’s most significant invention was dynamite. His fortune was earned as the result of his ownership of the Swedish manufacturing company that opened for business in 1875. That company was then known as Bofors, it is now split into two divisions. BAE Systems Bofors was acquired by the United States based company United Defense Industries and continues to supply the world government’s with heavy weapons such as the massive ship mounted artillery pieces seen on American destroyers. The company’s 40 mm anti-aircraft gun was based on a proprietary Bofors design and was produced and sold by the Swedish company to both sides throughout World War II. The second division of Bofors, formerly known as the Celsius Group, was purchased by Saab in 1999 and has since become known as Saab Bofors Dynamics. Saab Bofors Dynamics develops, manufactures and sells missile systems and anti-tank systems such as the RBS 70 SAM system, the portable shoulder fired disposable NLAW light anti-armor weapon as well as some of the more sophisticated missile systems all of which are sold to anyone with the money to purchase them and the willingness to use them against enemies real or imagined.

It is not uncommon for any of these five these prizes to be split between more than one winner and they are sometimes given to organizations as opposed to individuals. Four of the five Nobel prizes are awarded at the annual Prize Award Ceremony held in Stockholm, Sweden. The recipients for the prizes related to physiology or medicine, literature, economics, physics and chemistry are selected by committees established under the auspices of the Nobel Foundation. According to Alfred Nobel’s directive written into his last will and testament “the prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical works by Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm.”

The Nobel Peace Prize is unique among the five prizes awarded because Alfred Nobel stipulated in his will that the recipient or recipients be selected by a Norwegian committee appointed by the Norwegian Parliament and the prize is awarded to the recipient during a ceremony held at the Oslo City Hall. Nominations are received by numerous groups including University professors of history, political science, philosophy, law and theology, members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the International Court of Justice at the Hague, former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Institute, former recipients of the prize (such as Jimmy Carter), and a host of other groups and individuals. There were 205 nominations received by the Norwegian committee for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

The list of nominees is kept secret for fifty years following the award of the prize and a database of nominees for the years from 1901 to 1955 is available and there are some surprising names found in that list including Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Benito Mussolini. However surprising the list of former nominees might be it is nothing compared to the list of recipients.

1905
Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th President of the United States who allied the US with the Philippine people during their war of independence from Spanish rule, and then turned around and accepted control of the Philippines from the Spanish as reparations for the war. The outraged Philippine people who fought for independence from Spain soon saw their new Republic become a territory of the United States and their former U.S. allies used military force to suppress their anger.

1945
Cordell Hull, the former Secretary of State under Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s administration vehemently opposed granting political asylum to more than 950 Jewish refugees who escaped from Nazi persecution in Germany on the ship St. Louis sailing from Hamburg in the summer of 1939 just prior to World War II. The ship waited for months in the Caribbean Sea between Florida and Cuba while the debate raged on in the U.S. and after negotiations between the passengers and the Cuban government broke down the ship’s captain was forced to return to Europe and more than 25% of the passengers were slaughtered by the Nazis during the Holocaust.

1973
Henry A. Kissinger, former United States Secretary of State who instituted the secret bombing campaign in Cambodia that went on from 1960 through 1975; was heavily involved in Operation Condor, a mid-1970s campaign of kidnapping and murder coordinated among the intelligence and security services of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay. Originally the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize was to split between Kissinger and Lê Ðuc Tho, the Vietnamese Communist leader of the Viet-Cong who brutally terrorized and slaughtered the peaceful South Vietnamese villagers while waging war against their Democratic government, the French, and later the American Military who attempted to assist them, however, Lê Ðuc Tho spurned the Nobel Peace prize as a meaningless gesture; an opinion not shared by Kissinger who eagerly accepted it.

1978
Anwar Sadat, president of Egypt who initiated the brutal, but ill-fated Yom Kippur War against Israel in

1994
Yasser Arafat, the leader of the terrorist organization known as the Palestine Liberation Order (PLO) who popularized the Middle Eastern custom of manipulating unstable teenage religious fanatics and individuals with Down’s syndrome to become suicide bombers against Israel. Under the direct influence of Arafat, the leaders of the PLO would recruit and equip these suicide bombers with explosive vests packed with C4 and ball bearings which they would then detonate in crowded nightclubs, elementary schools and on public buses throughout Israel primarily targeting innocent civilians and children.

2002
Jimmy Carter, the 39th President of the United States whose refusal to assist the pro-U.S. Shah of Iran’s request for help in putting down a growing revolutionary movement in Iran resulted in the overthrow of the government and allowed the Ayatollah Khomeini to return and establish a distinctly anti-U.S. Islamic theocracy that has since kept the entire Middle East in a constant state of turmoil. The final year of Carter’s presidency was characterized by the 1979 takeover of the American embassy in Iran and Iran Hostage Crisis that lasted for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981. The 54 hostages were released within minutes of Ronald Reagan’s inauguration as the 40th President of the United States. The theocratic nation of Iran has maintained it’s vehement level of hatred for the United States since it’s inception and has been the main supplier of arms, ammunition and military training to Islamic terrorists throughout the Middle East. The fanatical Iranian Islamic government poses a serious threat to the security of the entire Western world as they race against time to develop a nuclear arsenal and there is little doubt among the current world leaders of merit that the Iranian government will use their nuclear weapons to consolidate their power over the entire Middle East and ultimately to attack Western nations and primarily the United States. This threat is the lasting legacy of Jimmy Carter, the winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

2004
Wangari Muta Maathai, a Kenyan environmental and political activist whose primary claim to fame seems to be that she started the rumor that the HIV/AIDS virus was “deliberately created by Western scientists to decimate the African population.”

2007
Al Gore, the 45th Vice President of the United States who served under President Bill Clinton and later became an overly outspoken environmental activist of dubious merit. Gore shared his prize with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The justification for this award to either party is somewhat vague and nobody really seems to understand why they were given the Nobel Peace Prize for their support of a pseudo-scientific theory that has never been conclusively proven to be accurate.

2009
Barack Obama – The official statement of the Nobel web site states that Obama was awarded the 2009 Peace prize “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”

____________________________________________________________

However “extraordinary” as Obama’s efforts might seem to some, he has accomplished nothing that can be even remotely viewed as beneficial to anyone, any group, or any nation on this planet. Under Barack Obama’s leadership the Democratic National Party has rededicated their considerable political power to becoming the only political party in the United States, and more often than not, the Republican Party appears to be assisting them in this effort by consistently moving further away from the conservative values shared by most American citizens who simply want to live peaceful lives, attain some level of financial comfort, raise their families according to their long-held beliefs and enjoy themselves without intrusive government intervention into their private lives and burdensome taxes that sap their savings to pay for entitlement programs for those too lazy to work for a living. Contrary to what the official statement might say, Barack Obama has not strengthened the cooperation between the American people he was elected to serve, he has intentionally taken advantage of it and purposely widened the gap between the working American citizens, and those who feel that that the government exists only to give them free financial support, free educations, free housing, free medical care, and free food. The promises he has made to provide these people with all of these things is only possible through the implementation of a Marxist system of government where those who are willing to work are made to pay the way for those who are not willing to work. It is a system of government that has been tried many times in many different countries, and in every case it has failed miserably. For 233 years the dream of attainable prosperity has motivated American citizens to work hard and save their money, invest wisely and ultimately achieve the highest level of comfort possible according to the capabilities and effort of the individual. Obama’s dream is to see the attainment of financial prosperity evaporate; take the hard earned money of the working class and distribute it to those who are unwilling to work and save and thereby achieve financial equality for everyone. The most evident problem with this line of thought is that if prosperity becomes impossible to attain, people will not be motivated to work and must be forced by threats of legal action and possible violence. When Barack Obama promised “Change” none of his supporters questioned the nature of these changes. Maybe they should have.

Most Americans have lived their entire lives not bothering to pay much attention to their government. Many of them have always figured it would be there when they needed it, and those who talked incessantly about political situations were avoided, considered right-wing wackos, conspiracy freaks, gun nuts and flat-taxers, pro-lifers and Bible thumping Pentecostal racists. This is the same crowd that figured they could sleep through the election and life would go on the same as it always has; nothing would change. While they were sleeping, millions of gum-smacking teenagers, illegal aliens, welfare recipients, union represented airheads and glassy eyed Kool-Aid drinking liberals went to the polls and voted for a certifiable nut-job hell bent on destroying our nation and our entire way of life. Even now, as some of you read these words many are still operating under the delusional belief that nothing is going to change, life will go on as it always has and nothing will happen. Anyone that truly believes that is in for one really rude awakening and it is coming at them a lot faster than they realize, and the fact of the matter is it’s already here. You are already a slave to a government that takes more than half of everything you earn and plans to take even more in the future. You, your children, your grandchildren and their grandchildren will spend their lives working to pay off the massive foreign debts that Obama has amassed just in the last ten months, to say nothing of what he will borrow in the future to implement future changes as he see fit.

All across this nation people just like those who slept through the election and quite a few that voted for the man who promised “Change” are starting to realize the serious error they have made. Formerly very quiet people are beginning to speak out against what they see going on in the government that once got it’s authority from them and now exercises it’s authority over them. People are getting angry at what they are witnessing and some are talking about the need for drastic measures. Obama may be completely out of touch with reality but those who have propped him up, pushed hard to get that nobody elected and want to see their agenda succeed are aware of what is being said and they are well aware that their plans can be swept away to nothing if the American people stand united. They are afraid of us. You can feel their fear on the streets of Washington D.C.; you can see it in their eyes and know they will do everything in their power to distract our attention with smoke and mirrors, bread and circuses, anything to keep us divided while they hurry to finish their work before the American people wake up to the fact that they’ve been sucker punched.

When the American people wake up there will be no Democrats and there will be no Republicans. African-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Native-Americans, Asian-Americans and every other variation of hyphenated American will disappear overnight and the elitist politicians who make up the rules that they demand we follow will stand face to face with unified Americans. A group without color; a group that shared the one common heritage of freedom and liberty, and a group with one common goal, the restoration of a once great nation and the eradication of all who stand in their way. You can leave your slingshot at home because the brave sons and daughters who now serve in the American military are as sick and tired of the politician’s crap as we are and they will be standing there with everyone else, shoulder to shoulder when that great day comes, and the tree of liberty will quench its thirst with the blood of tyrants.

On second thought, if Obama proves to be the proverbial final straw that breaks the camels back, stirs up the sleeping tiger and sets off a new American Revolution that ultimately restores American freedom, liberty and prosperity thereby making the entire world a much safer and better place to live, maybe he does deserve a shiny medal for the destruction he’s caused. Maybe he can use it to buy himself a comfy corner in the ninth circle. After all, the laborer is worthy of his hire, and even Judas got his 30 pieces of silver.

Technorati Tags

Barack Obama

digg this | del.icio.us