We are coming in America to living under the rule of man, the very state of affairs the Founders abhorred and rebelled against.
Who are these men and women who seek to rule us?
1. THE PRESIDENT. He campaigned on the idea of reshaping America in accordance with his own personal view of what America should be. And together with other Democrats proclaims the Constitution is out of date and inapplicable to modern times and issues. "Nobody argues that anymore", I have heard them claim, as they sweep away the foundation of all our laws and its intended restraints on the rule of man.
2. MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, PARTICULARLY HOUSE AND SENATE MAJORITY LEADERS. Simply put, with a majority in both houses of Congress, they believe they are free to pass any law they wish. Without the Constitution to restrain them, limiting them to specifically enumerated powers and protecting our individual freedom, they perceive no limit to what they can do.
3. CZARS. Appointed by the President, these hundreds of heads of government agencies implement rules and regulations on their own whim that govern almost all phases of our lives...stealing the authority to make laws from the legislative branch (Congress) and bringing it over to the executive branch, and destroying the protection against tyranny that the separation of powers doctrine gave us.
4. MEDIA. Media now tend to see themselves as influential promoters of particular ideologies, rather then reporters of news.
5. THE PUBLIC. Positions on current issues are often "supported" by polls that presume to show what the American public favors...as if our country is meant to be run by mob rule. Much of the public is buying into its new found power.
Schools grease the way for the disastrous movement we are witnessing away from the rule of law to the rule of man by teaching our youth that there are is no objective standard to determine ethical and political rights and wrongs. That leaves our country in the hands of, and at the mercy of, the Tyrannical 5 above.
The Founders knew better. They knew that our divine rights are to be found in our nature...and it is that fact which makes them unalienable by man. Every bit of governmental oppression in history has come about under the rule of man. The Founders gave us a treasured gift of a lifetime. Are we to let it be stolen from us?
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
30 DAYS HATH JANUARY
The American calendar is in shambles.
For example: A month can have 28 days, or 29 or 30 or 31. So you can't properly use month as a basis for measurement. The fact that fewer murders were committed, or retail sales were lower, this month than last, means little...it might simply be a reflection that this is a 28 day month, and last month had 31 days.
Also, our national holidays, om which most people don't work, are not spread equally across the months. Some, like March and August, have none, and some have one, some two. Labor Day, which is the first Tuesday after the first Monday of September (who thought of that absurdity?) can come anywhere from the 2nd to the 8th of the month. The Spanish word for month is mes...and that would be a good word to describe our calendar.
There is no particular cosmic reason why a week must have 7 days or that there be exactly 4 weeks in a month (which, actually, except for a 28 day February, there isn't now. Substantial variations have occurred throughout history and throughout the world. So, to straighten the calendar out some, to organize our time a bit better, here is my proposal for the new 21st Centurion Calendar:
Each week would have 10 days...think of them as 3 days ON followed by 1 day OFF, followed by 4 days ON followed by 2 days OFF. The ON days could generally be school or work days, the OFF days are rest days. All national holidays would be set on OFF days.
There would be 3 weeks, or 30 days, in each month...12 months per year. That's 360 days. Every month would begin with the first day of the week (say, Sunday) , and end on the 10th day of a week (say, Victory...see below). At the end of the 12 months, there would be a 5 day countrywide Jubilee...parades, parties, musical extravaganzas, fanfare, spectacles, prayers, benedictions, blessings, etc. to celebrate the joy and wonder of life. Total: 365 days. (Every 4th year the Jubilee would be extended to 6 days).
Benefits?
*** 9 OFF days a month for sailing with the wind, dreaming and soul searching. Plus that year end Jubilee! That's an almost 20% increase in personal pleasure time over the 8 weekend days per month we now have.
***Symmetry in the months (as we now have only in weeks), beneficial for statistical comparisons, scheduling, calculating time intervals, etc. What's today's date? It's a Tuesday...it's either the 3rd, 13th or 23rd of the month. Easy.
***A measure of order to that important element in our lives: Time.
I have thoughts about changing the names of the days to Beauty, Glory, Hope, Justice, Pride, Respect, Trust, Unity, Valor, Victory...but that's for another post.
For example: A month can have 28 days, or 29 or 30 or 31. So you can't properly use month as a basis for measurement. The fact that fewer murders were committed, or retail sales were lower, this month than last, means little...it might simply be a reflection that this is a 28 day month, and last month had 31 days.
Also, our national holidays, om which most people don't work, are not spread equally across the months. Some, like March and August, have none, and some have one, some two. Labor Day, which is the first Tuesday after the first Monday of September (who thought of that absurdity?) can come anywhere from the 2nd to the 8th of the month. The Spanish word for month is mes...and that would be a good word to describe our calendar.
There is no particular cosmic reason why a week must have 7 days or that there be exactly 4 weeks in a month (which, actually, except for a 28 day February, there isn't now. Substantial variations have occurred throughout history and throughout the world. So, to straighten the calendar out some, to organize our time a bit better, here is my proposal for the new 21st Centurion Calendar:
Each week would have 10 days...think of them as 3 days ON followed by 1 day OFF, followed by 4 days ON followed by 2 days OFF. The ON days could generally be school or work days, the OFF days are rest days. All national holidays would be set on OFF days.
There would be 3 weeks, or 30 days, in each month...12 months per year. That's 360 days. Every month would begin with the first day of the week (say, Sunday) , and end on the 10th day of a week (say, Victory...see below). At the end of the 12 months, there would be a 5 day countrywide Jubilee...parades, parties, musical extravaganzas, fanfare, spectacles, prayers, benedictions, blessings, etc. to celebrate the joy and wonder of life. Total: 365 days. (Every 4th year the Jubilee would be extended to 6 days).
Benefits?
*** 9 OFF days a month for sailing with the wind, dreaming and soul searching. Plus that year end Jubilee! That's an almost 20% increase in personal pleasure time over the 8 weekend days per month we now have.
***Symmetry in the months (as we now have only in weeks), beneficial for statistical comparisons, scheduling, calculating time intervals, etc. What's today's date? It's a Tuesday...it's either the 3rd, 13th or 23rd of the month. Easy.
***A measure of order to that important element in our lives: Time.
I have thoughts about changing the names of the days to Beauty, Glory, Hope, Justice, Pride, Respect, Trust, Unity, Valor, Victory...but that's for another post.
ON THE WINGS OF HISTORY
At the Tea Party convention in Nashville, Sarah Palin said that "we ought not be afraid to return to our heritage as a God-fearing country, and to seek divine intervention to help make us safe, secure and prosperous". "(When I was younger and believed in God, I was forever bothered by the expression "God-fearing", since the debilitating feeling of fear was never an emotion I felt toward the God that I loved. Quite the contrary!)
So it's our God against their God, is it? That would be taking us way back in time, to the dark ages and beyond, when many believed that the Gods raged against each other for supremacy of the heavens and of mankind. Those who wage war against us, Ms. Palin, have sought intervention from their God and he is apparently directing them to destroy progress and civilization, to kill innocent people en masse, to fight to the end, and to die, in exchange for heavenly rewards.
That is where we are today, Ms. Palin, and we are not winning. You are right that we must return to something. But what sparked this nation into being was not a fear of God, or a love of God, but three fundamental and historically revolutionary ideas:
* That each of us is a sovereign independent individual.
** That what governs man's life is a knowable natural law...that is,the nature of the human species and the nature of the world he lives in...and it is immutable.
*** That to secure his life, man needs but a very limited government.
Those are the ideas we ought return to, we need return to, if we are to be "safe, secure and prosperous". Those ideas propelled our Revolution, propelled America to greatness, and they will propel us to do what must be done to attain victory over those whose God directs them to destroy us and our ideals.
And not only should we not be afraid to return to that past, but history should embolden us to do so.
So it's our God against their God, is it? That would be taking us way back in time, to the dark ages and beyond, when many believed that the Gods raged against each other for supremacy of the heavens and of mankind. Those who wage war against us, Ms. Palin, have sought intervention from their God and he is apparently directing them to destroy progress and civilization, to kill innocent people en masse, to fight to the end, and to die, in exchange for heavenly rewards.
That is where we are today, Ms. Palin, and we are not winning. You are right that we must return to something. But what sparked this nation into being was not a fear of God, or a love of God, but three fundamental and historically revolutionary ideas:
* That each of us is a sovereign independent individual.
** That what governs man's life is a knowable natural law...that is,the nature of the human species and the nature of the world he lives in...and it is immutable.
*** That to secure his life, man needs but a very limited government.
Those are the ideas we ought return to, we need return to, if we are to be "safe, secure and prosperous". Those ideas propelled our Revolution, propelled America to greatness, and they will propel us to do what must be done to attain victory over those whose God directs them to destroy us and our ideals.
And not only should we not be afraid to return to that past, but history should embolden us to do so.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
TO BE AND NOT TO BE
BE...
BEATIFY
BECOME
BEDAZZLE
BEFRIEND
BEHOLD
BELIEVE
BELOVED
BESTOW
NOT TO BE...-
BEDEVIL
BEFRAZZLE
BEFUDDLE
BEGRUDGE
BEGUILE
BELEAGUER
BESMIRCH
BETRAY
BEWILDER
BEATIFY
BECOME
BEDAZZLE
BEFRIEND
BEHOLD
BELIEVE
BELOVED
BESTOW
NOT TO BE...-
BEDEVIL
BEFRAZZLE
BEFUDDLE
BEGRUDGE
BEGUILE
BELEAGUER
BESMIRCH
BETRAY
BEWILDER
Friday, February 5, 2010
FORTUNATELY, LIFE IS MEANINGLESS
There is no meaning to your life exterior to how you choose to live it. Shock!
There is no purpose to your life outside of what you choose to do with it. Shock!
There is no Grand Plan in which your life has a particular role. Shock!
Or if you think there is, prove it to me. (Don't ask me to prove the absence of something...he who asserts the positive carries the burden of proof because only the existence, the reality, of something can be shown to be true.)
You are alive. The elements of which life is composed came together and formed YOU. You are a state of existence. Rejoice in that fact, be pleased, delighted, thrilled, enraptured, by it...or not. Your life, your choice. Imagine the potential pain you would suffer if the meaning and purpose of your life were actually predetermined and conflicted with what would have been your choice. Regardless of toward what end you lived your life, you would likely feel a sense of dissatisfaction, incompleteness and uncertainty. Is that not where most people are today on this important issue?
We have been misguidedly taught for centuries to search outside ourselves for the meaning of life. Expressions like "I was born to be...", "It was intended that I...", "It was written in the stars that...", all feed the fallacy that the meaning of our life is to be found "out there". We have been told that we are a tool of a god's design, a vital link in a cosmically unfolding eternity...and that is in those areas that we must seek the answer as to what life is all about. Most of us never find it, even after a lifetime search and contemplation.
For good reason. The ultimate significance of our life resides within us. It is something we must design, shape, fashion, create, for ourselves, as we do our individual character and identity. We do not acquire it by default, but by choice and action. It is as petty or as grand as we dare to make it, and as we can make it. It is not cast in stone. It is our own, special and unique creation.
And it is a creation to be refined every moment of our lives.
There is no purpose to your life outside of what you choose to do with it. Shock!
There is no Grand Plan in which your life has a particular role. Shock!
Or if you think there is, prove it to me. (Don't ask me to prove the absence of something...he who asserts the positive carries the burden of proof because only the existence, the reality, of something can be shown to be true.)
You are alive. The elements of which life is composed came together and formed YOU. You are a state of existence. Rejoice in that fact, be pleased, delighted, thrilled, enraptured, by it...or not. Your life, your choice. Imagine the potential pain you would suffer if the meaning and purpose of your life were actually predetermined and conflicted with what would have been your choice. Regardless of toward what end you lived your life, you would likely feel a sense of dissatisfaction, incompleteness and uncertainty. Is that not where most people are today on this important issue?
We have been misguidedly taught for centuries to search outside ourselves for the meaning of life. Expressions like "I was born to be...", "It was intended that I...", "It was written in the stars that...", all feed the fallacy that the meaning of our life is to be found "out there". We have been told that we are a tool of a god's design, a vital link in a cosmically unfolding eternity...and that is in those areas that we must seek the answer as to what life is all about. Most of us never find it, even after a lifetime search and contemplation.
For good reason. The ultimate significance of our life resides within us. It is something we must design, shape, fashion, create, for ourselves, as we do our individual character and identity. We do not acquire it by default, but by choice and action. It is as petty or as grand as we dare to make it, and as we can make it. It is not cast in stone. It is our own, special and unique creation.
And it is a creation to be refined every moment of our lives.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
IN THE PALM OF YOUR HAND
Perhaps the most commonly referred to right is the right to life. It is also, perhaps, the most misconstrued and misunderstood.
The right to life, as is everything else in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, is a limitation on the power of government, which was the prime concern of the Founding Fathers. It was as if the Founders were each holding a hand up at the government saying "Whoa, this you, the government, cannot do because we have the right to life, the right to choose the course of our lives." The same holds true for all the other rights ("You, the government, cannot restrict what we say because we have the right to free speech", etc.). The same holds true for the enumerated powers: "These powers we the people give you, you may do nothing more".
The distortion of the right to life is occurring as more and more people are not putting their hands up saying "WHOA", but putting their hands out, palms up, saying "GIMME, I am entitled". For example, the argument for nationalized health insurance is now "I have a right to life, I need low cost medical treatments to live, don't I?...therefore I have a right to low cost medical treatments, gimme". Similarly, "I need affordable college education to live, therefore I have a right to affordable education, gimme". And on and on...food, shelter, clothing, money, ????
Far from being seen as a restraint of government and for what it was gloriously intended to preserve: the sovereignty of the people, the right to life is now being employed to extend the force of the government beyond its enumerated powers and to mandate to us what we must do and how we must live our lives. There are rumblings in the graveyard.
Hand thrust out, palm up...or hand thrust up, palm out? We know what it was in the past. What shall it be in the future?
The right to life, as is everything else in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, is a limitation on the power of government, which was the prime concern of the Founding Fathers. It was as if the Founders were each holding a hand up at the government saying "Whoa, this you, the government, cannot do because we have the right to life, the right to choose the course of our lives." The same holds true for all the other rights ("You, the government, cannot restrict what we say because we have the right to free speech", etc.). The same holds true for the enumerated powers: "These powers we the people give you, you may do nothing more".
The distortion of the right to life is occurring as more and more people are not putting their hands up saying "WHOA", but putting their hands out, palms up, saying "GIMME, I am entitled". For example, the argument for nationalized health insurance is now "I have a right to life, I need low cost medical treatments to live, don't I?...therefore I have a right to low cost medical treatments, gimme". Similarly, "I need affordable college education to live, therefore I have a right to affordable education, gimme". And on and on...food, shelter, clothing, money, ????
Far from being seen as a restraint of government and for what it was gloriously intended to preserve: the sovereignty of the people, the right to life is now being employed to extend the force of the government beyond its enumerated powers and to mandate to us what we must do and how we must live our lives. There are rumblings in the graveyard.
Hand thrust out, palm up...or hand thrust up, palm out? We know what it was in the past. What shall it be in the future?
Monday, February 1, 2010
ONE HAT TOO MANY
America's political system is a very good one, but it ain't perfect.
One of the main flaws of our present system is that the President, the chief executive of the country, remains an entrenched politician...he remains the head of a particular political party. So,as President he is meant to promote the interest of the entire country, while as head of a political party he is meant to be loyal to the agenda of a particular segment of the population...and the two may be in total conflict with each other. Hard to wear two hats at the same time.
Notice how President Obama will "chastise" Republicans, some of the people he is sworn to represent, for not supporting his Democratic health plan. Should he not at least calmly and seriously consider their views? Is he not trying to do the best for all Americans regardless of their political affiliations? Are Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians, etc. the President's enemies or his constituents? Ought those who attend Tea Party gatherings be listened to...or ignored, as they now are? Do they not all pay his salary?
And how does the President's holding down two jobs interfere with his learning process. Assume the President came to realize that his party's position on an issue--say, abortions--is wrong. How easy would it be for him to change his view during his Presidency and promote a law banning abortion? He would be viewed not as an enlightened President willing to learn and committed to doing the right thing...which presumably would be of benefit to the entire country...but as a traitor, someone devoid of loyalty to his party, someone hurting the party's chances in future elections. How often have you seen a sitting President of any party admit an error, a mistake? Fingers of one hand? One finger?
President Obama speaks about bipartisanship and cooperation. Hard to get when the President himself is firmly skewered toward one political party, and feels obliged to cater to the views of that party, regardless.
The President's role as Chief Executive should preempt any other position. Once elected, someone else should be designated head of the party. That won't necessarily eliminate all of these problems, but it may...may...make it easier for the President to do the right thing. Wouldn't that be best for everyone?
The flag hanging outside the White House, Mr. President, is not the flag of the Democratic party...it is the American flag.
One of the main flaws of our present system is that the President, the chief executive of the country, remains an entrenched politician...he remains the head of a particular political party. So,as President he is meant to promote the interest of the entire country, while as head of a political party he is meant to be loyal to the agenda of a particular segment of the population...and the two may be in total conflict with each other. Hard to wear two hats at the same time.
Notice how President Obama will "chastise" Republicans, some of the people he is sworn to represent, for not supporting his Democratic health plan. Should he not at least calmly and seriously consider their views? Is he not trying to do the best for all Americans regardless of their political affiliations? Are Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians, etc. the President's enemies or his constituents? Ought those who attend Tea Party gatherings be listened to...or ignored, as they now are? Do they not all pay his salary?
And how does the President's holding down two jobs interfere with his learning process. Assume the President came to realize that his party's position on an issue--say, abortions--is wrong. How easy would it be for him to change his view during his Presidency and promote a law banning abortion? He would be viewed not as an enlightened President willing to learn and committed to doing the right thing...which presumably would be of benefit to the entire country...but as a traitor, someone devoid of loyalty to his party, someone hurting the party's chances in future elections. How often have you seen a sitting President of any party admit an error, a mistake? Fingers of one hand? One finger?
President Obama speaks about bipartisanship and cooperation. Hard to get when the President himself is firmly skewered toward one political party, and feels obliged to cater to the views of that party, regardless.
The President's role as Chief Executive should preempt any other position. Once elected, someone else should be designated head of the party. That won't necessarily eliminate all of these problems, but it may...may...make it easier for the President to do the right thing. Wouldn't that be best for everyone?
The flag hanging outside the White House, Mr. President, is not the flag of the Democratic party...it is the American flag.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)