An Open Letter to John McCain

Senator McCain:

You have won the primary election in Arizona and you will be the Republican candidate from Arizona for the US Senate.

Your tried and proven tactic of moving radically away from left-center and toward the right in an election year, combined with an unusually negative ad campaign against JD Hayworth, was successful.

I want you to know that, just as I promised in February, I joined the Republican Party so that I could easily vote in the primary against you and for JD. I voted for JD because I believe he is more of a true constitutionalist than you are. I believe he is more dedicated to preserving the personal liberties that the founders called "Natural rights".

I encourage you to be true to your recent tack to the "right" and to recommit yourself and submit your personal agenda to the preservation and restoration of the liberties our country was born to protect.

Please, Sir, do not sell us out. Do not return to your "maverick" and unpredictable ways. Please, Sir, stay true to the Constitution and to "we, the people".

Respectfully,

John N. Ellis

Memories Of A Powerful Lesson...

I was just 18 years old. I'd skated through high school, studying only when it was measured and recorded. I was sharp enough to be able to sit in class, listen to the lecture and discussion, and glean enough good answers to pass tests with As or Bs.

And now I was in US Army Basic Training, surrounded by young men who struggled with remembering that the right hand and right foot are on the same side of the body. Some of them had never brushed their teeth or taken a shower in their lives. It was winter in Missouri, and the longer it took them to catch on to simple tasks like putting the fuze into a land mine ("righty tighty, lefty loosy") or disassembling an assault rifle, the more miserably cold I was - and the less patient I felt.

You see, I was one of the smartest people in the company. And for all I knew, I was probably one of the smartest people in the Army, if some of my drill instructors were a representative sample.

We'd spent the morning on the rifle range, firing at green plastic silhouettes holding painted AK-47s, the infantry weapon of choice of our enemy - Ivan the Communist. Now, it was time to march back to base for lunch. But before we left, true to form, our drill instructors decided it was time for a little physical training, just to whet the appetite.

PT, as we called it, was torturous. The drill instructors seemed to derive some sick pleasure from seeing us sweating, muscles shaking, faces and bodies covered with dirt, grass and twigs. And so they marched us into a large clear field. We placed our steel helmets and our rifles atop our rucksacks. Then we marched off into an extended formation for an hour of sheer agony.

It was a warm day, relatively speaking, and I knew it was only going to get hotter as soon as the PT Pain Train hit us. So I took my gloves off and tossed them under my helmet.

Marching out to the field I heard Staff Sergeant Mathis call me, "Ellis! Come on over here!" His tone was kind and disarming. "What's wrong with your hands?" he asked with concern.

"Nothing, Sergeant", I replied.

"Look at your hands and then look at the rest of the company. What do you notice?"

I gave him a blank look.

"Where are your gloves?" Still kind and concerned.

"Under my helmet, Sergeant. I knew it was going to get hot." I reasoned with him.

"Why don't you go get them." A statement, and I trotted off to retrieve my gloves. I'd gone about 5 yards when "YOU'D BETTER RUN!" boomed after me and I sprinted there and back.

"Ellis, have you ever done the 'Locomotion'?" Sergeant Mathis asked.

"No, Sergeant," was my watery reply.

Sergeant Mathis then demonstrated a method of walking in which hands are clasped behind the head and, neck and back straight and erect, the victim walks - or runs - touching knees to elbows. He ordered me to run around the extended formation, a circuit of about 100 yards, 3 times and report to him behind the formation of my peers.

I was out of breath when I finished the assignment, but my anguish was not sufficient for Sergeant Mathis. For the next 15 minutes he proceeded to "grass drill" me, running me through a rapidly changing series of push-ups, sit-ups, and running in place. By the time he yelled "Stop!" I had been reduced to tears.

As I sobbed, down in my 3-point stance, Sergeant Mathis quietly asked, "Ellis, do you know why I did that?"

"N-n-no, Sergeant-t", came my reply.

"I did that because you need to understand that you are part of this unit, and part of this Army. You may be smarter than some, and you may catch on quicker than others, but you are not better than any other member of this team."

That experience in humiliation was intensely focusing. I learned a lesson that should have come from Sunday School, or from my parents. In all honesty, it probably had come from those places, but, as the saying goes, when the student is ready, the teacher appears.

I was ready. The teacher appeared. And my life, the way I see and treat others from all walks of life and all levels of society, was changed forever. I suddenly and deeply understood that we are all pilgrims and we are all strangers and we all have things to give and things to learrn. I was not a higher quality human being because I had better hygiene practices. I was not a better person because I was a brighter student.

All of us have an obligation to use the gifts God has given us to improve the world we live in. All of us have an obligation to treat each other well.

As a post script, three soldiers in the rear of the formation, closest to the site of my destruction, looked and laughed as I was being torn down one piece at a time. Their behavior didn't escape Sergeant Mathis' attention and, when he'd sent me back into formation he called the three gigglers out.

What I'd just gone through suddenly looked like a warm-up!

The post script taught me that there can be compassion in discipline, and that there is justice in the world.

Thoughts On My Own Self-Betrayal...

In my personal culture quick conformity and prompt obedience have always been valued traits. My father was a mechanical engineer and my mother was an English teacher, so structure and order and rules and laws were always paramount. Form followed function and whimsy was almost never acceptable.


Even in play, we were taught the principles of "success". One of my mother's favorite games was "Scrabble". If you want a more rule-bound game, I don't know if you will find it. Points are clearly defined, words are perfectly spelled, and placement on the board is governed by a rigid grid.

My father is a terrible speller who did not enjoy "Scrabble", but who, when he did play, liked rule-bound games as well. "Hide-and-Seek" became an exercise in reducing noise and movement, avoiding silhouettes and shadow casting, precise movement and patient waiting.

Creativity was not forbidden. It was simply never a consideration.

In religious practice, I had two examples, as well. My father was almost obsessively committed to the physical rituals of the church. He was determined to attend every meeting and to fill each assignment as if it were the only thing he had to do.

My mother was never moved by the faith, but she doggedly followed the culture, attending women's meetings, teaching Sunday School when asked, and trying to keep up with expectations. She always had a smiling face and a cheerful answer when anyone asked about anything. Even when it wasn't true.

Discipline was strict and physical from both of my parents, and its enforcement was far from capricious. In fact, it seemed to me that every chance to correct behavior was taken. Failure to comply with a firm set of rules resulted in pain.

So, when I graduated high school and enlisted in the Army, following direction and obeying rules was the least of my concerns. I did that almost automatically.

My level of compliance was convenient. It required almost no thought and did not allow for introspection. In retrospect I can see that self-betrayal was the price of that convenience.

The first time I am aware of betraying myself in favor of compliance, I was a junior in high school. My ambition then was to be an architect and to design homes and mixed-use spaces. Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, California had a fine architecture program and ran a summer architecture experience for young people like me. I was excited to attend and to launch my education and begin my career.

On the first day of the three-week work shop we were given an assignment to design a living space much like a condominium. I was completely engaged until the instructor told us that we should not consider whether or not our design was buildable, but only think about the form of the thing. Alarm bells went off inside my head. The engineer-father scoffed at the notion; the grammarian-mother couldn't even consider the possibilities of working outside the world of the expected.

And in that moment, even before I realized it, I betrayed myself. I submitted my dreams to the authority of my parents. I decided that architecture was not for me.

I don't say that submission to authority is always wrong. In fact, sometimes it is exactly the thing to do. I do say, however, that questioning authority with the purpose of understanding; and questioning self for the same ends, is not only good, but right for each of us to do.

Since that moment - and probably long before - self-betrayal has been a way of life for me. I did not want to let others (read: parents, peers, teachers, employers, spouse, etc.) down, and I never learned to consider myself. Only recently have I begun questioning the institutions that have been most sacrosanct in my life - my work, my country, my religion and my family.

What began as a scary proposition - this questionning - one that was completely foreign and virtually forbidden, has become a painful and pleasurable, exhilerating and confusing, dark and enlightening journey. I have found more faith and less blindness, more love and less fear, than I ever imagined in the world.

I am determined to learn how to help my children avoid the self-betrayal and faithless following that has taken me so long to even recognize.

And I am still waiting to find the self that I began betraying before I knew I was doing it.

Caveat Emptor...

Buyer, beware!

The recent decision in California of a single judge to negate the voice of the majority of the state's voting population - and a large majority, at that - should ring alarm bells inside the head of every person who hears of it!

What? you say.  Even those homosexuals who are longing to enter into the "holy order of matrimony" should worry?

Absolutely.  And Joe Biden said it best in a speech on the floor of the US Senate years ago, when Republicans controlled both houses of congress.  He warned that, while the Republicans were in the majority then, they would not be always and they should watch what they do and how they do it.

You see, today it was a "progressive" judge whose personal bias informed his decision to invalidate due process and constitutionality.  It was a big "win" for progressive people and for those who are sympathetic to the cause of homosexual marriage.

But tomorrow it may be a "conservative" judge, a "biggoted" judge, or a "Christian" judge on the bench.  And the issue may be the environment or immigration or some other cause that fires the imagination and stirs the secular-progressive heart.  He - it will certainly be a late-middle-aged white man - may decide that he has seen enough of those Jesus-haters who, like ancient pagans, worship Mother Earth and make a daily sacrifice to her of the prosperous life and hard work of Americans. 

And just as easily, that judge might rule that to restrict commerce and to confiscate the wealth of hard workers is a flagrant violation of the Constitutional principles on which this great - if flawed - nation was founded.  He may feel that reducing the standard of living in America to the equivalent of that of Cambodia is wrong.  He may strike down environmental laws.

The fact that our children have learned the religion of Earth for three generations will be irrelevant.  The fact that most of the people in America believe in the sanctity of Earth will be ignored.  Even if the people vote to make a law or to amend the Constitution to define goodness toward Earth, they will be powerless to protect Her.

Always, always, always remember that a sword will cut both ways. 

Much along the line of a popular anti-gun talking point that claims you should not carry a gun for self-defense because you are more likely to have it taken from you and used against you than you are to stop an attack, secular-progressives and ultra-traditionalists alike should be very concerned with this ruling.

Jobs Bill Passes Senate...

Yesterday, the US Senate voted to approve a House bill appropriating $26,000,000,000 (billion) to fund state and municipal employment for 1 year.  Note that this bill is not intended to add any jobs to the economy.  It is designed ONLY to preserve state and municipal jobs that are already filled!  NO ONE WILL COME OFF UNEMPLOYMENT because of this spending.

What in the world are senators and representatives doing pooling personal and corporate tax money collected at a federal level and redistributing it to state and municipal workers? 

It seems that this is a problem for the 10th and 14th Amendments to resolve.  Shouldn't the US Supreme Court strike this act down? 

In Iowa the president of the AFSME (government employees union) has declared that this bill is essential because the families of government workers cannot afford to lose jobs right now.  That statement raises some questions in my mind.

First, when is a good time for a worker to lose his or her job?  And what makes this union president think that now is a good time for me and my family to pay for someone else to keep their job?

Second, why is this not funded by an increase in taxes so that this year every American pays an extra $80 in income tax this year?  Just add a line to the Form 1040, 1040 A and 1040 EZ that assesses each person on the tax return - including dependents - $80 to pay for a 1-year support fund for state and municipal employees.

Third, why is it alright for all Americans who earn enough money to pay income taxes to pay for someone else's livelihood for generations in the form of interminable debt payments?

And then we could fund the stimulus packages the same way.  Each trillion dollar unit would be directly assessed at a rate of $3,000 per person per year.  So, we don't incur anymore debt, right?

I'll bet we wouldn't see anymore stimulus, too!  My family alone would be on the hook for more than $20,000 per trillion.  I'd fight that.

Most Curious...

I am, again, working out of state.  This weekend, however, is different.

When I checked into the Marriott I've virtually lived at since March, the hostess offered to move me from the 5th floor to the 8th floor on Friday morning (yesterday).  I told her I did not want to move, but she repeated her offer adding that the hotel was hosting an anime convention from Friday afternoon to Sunday morning and the young people might be noisy.  She said, in a low voice, "Um, Mr. Ellis, things get kind of weird around here."

Anime is that really terrible Japanese animation that brought us cartoons like "Speed Racer" in the 1980s.

I assured her that I had enough kids at home that a little noisy fun would not bother me.  That was Tuesday night. 

On Thursday afternoon, coming back in from work, I noticed a group of youths sitting in the lobby.  One girl was wearing a plush headdress that made her look like the Pokemon character Pik-a-chu.

By 10pm Thursday the hotel seemed full of young people who appeared to be what we used to call "mods" or "goths" or "emo's".  They were all nice enough, and seemed to be having a good time.  Things in the hall outside my room were pretty loud until after midnight, but I'm pretty easy going.

When I came in from work last night (Friday) just before 8pm the hotel was crawling with youths - and some people who were just too old to be dressing up - in costumes ranging from monsters to mutants to ninjas to nurses.  I stopped at the front desk and the hostess, Kari, said, "Mr. Ellis, I told you!  Things get weird around here!"  I agreed with her.

It's Saturday afternoon and more than 200 costumed anime fans are on the hotel patio watching 2 of their ninja brethren in a mock sword fight, played out to the beat of a kibuki drummer girl, interrupted periodically for a line or two of stand-up comedy from the black ninja.  (The red ninja appears to be the "straight man".)  And the crowd is clapping and laughing enthusiastically.  Blue wigs and huge furry ears are nodding with understanding. 

The black ninja is saying something they can relate to!

Walking below my window is a very large black woman in a Thumbelina-esque costume and a stick thin young white man wearing nothing but a criss-crossed belt for a shirt, black trousers, and a black military hat.  Quite a pair. 

For all the freakishness, though, I have to make a few observations.
1.  No one is walking around texting or even talking on a cell phone.  All of their interactions are really in person!
2.  No one has been obviously intoxicated, smoking cigarettes is very rare, and they are not cursing.
3.  No one is fighting.  In fact there appears to be total love and acceptance of all by all.  They seem to be having a lot of good clean weird fun!

That's nice to see.

The New Bill of Rights - And The Old One...

I got a kick out of this picture.  The resolution isn't what I'd like it to be, but it's clear enough to get the idea.

The bottom line is that we have to watch our representatives in Congress, the president, and the Supreme Court verrrry closely to ensure that they are not giving us a "New" Bill of Rights.

Just in case you've forgotten what all those Amendments were, here's a list of the first Ten.  It's a quick read, and one that is well worth your time.  Remember that what you read in a few short minutes is the fruit of literally thousands of years of human thought and countless attempts at self-government.

Do you remember anyone talking about Amendments 9 and 10 in your lifetime?  I know that I've never heard a word about Amendment 9, and the last time anyone mentioned Amendment 10 (who was not Governor Perry of Texas) was in 8th grade when we studied the Civil War.

Here you go.  Learn it.  Live it.  Love it.

The 1st Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


The 2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


The 3rd Amendment
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


The 4th Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


The 5th Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


The 6th Amendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


The 7th Amendment
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


The 8th Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


The 9th Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


The 10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Which Is More Offensive...?

Here's a photo of an Iowa billboard.  Look at it and consider it along with the Democrat Congressman's statement in the post below.

Think deeply and decide which you find more offensive.  Why is that?

I frankly find it more offensive to be expected to believe a bald-faced lie told by an arrogant and condescending politician than to be invited to consider an opinion expressed by a passionate person, be they ever so rude or ignorant.

This Is UNBELIEVABLE!

How, in today's technological and political environment, can this California Democrat expect anyone - even a staunch ally - to believe his statement?

Despicable contempt shown for the intelligence of his constituents.

Breitbart.tv » Democrat Congressman ‘Unaware’ of the New Black Panther Voter Intimidation Case

A Lot Can Happen In 20 Months...

Okay. Not too many of us "US Americans" are happy with the radical (meaning "having to do with the root") changes we've seen in our country in the past 20 months.

We've seen the debt skyrocket. When we consider the real cost of paying down the debt and funding all of the other entitlement obligations the United States has incurred, we realize that it is quite impossible. Literally, impossible.

We've seen cronyism at its best in the selective bailouts of banks and other businesses. Why did Lehman Brothers get help while Bear Stearns was allowed to fail? Why is GM still a going concern, while Chrysler is bankrupt and its assets are owned by a minor Italian car company? Why did congressmen and senators advocate in behalf of some GM dealerships, but not others, reversing the closings of the chosen few? Why were investors - private, legitimate investors - forced by the government to accept less than they were legally entitled to during the bankruptcy proceedings of some businesses?

We've seen stagnation in a war that the current administration said was not only necessary, but ultimately winnable. The military in Afghanistan has been given a mere fraction of the resources needed to accomplish their goals, while the president and his advisors are distracted by other matters.

We saw healthcare reform rammed through congress and down our throats inspite of the overwhelming resistance to a bill that no person in congress had read or understood, the full effects of which have yet to be felt because of the strategic timing of its effectiveness. The bill will not be fully enacted until after the president's reelection campaign in 2012.

We have seen the complete and utter mismanagement of an environmental disaster the likes of which the United States has never seen. From absolute corruption in the administration's oversight agency to apparent appathy on the part of the president, it has been an absolute goat rope.

We see the federal government suing the sovereign State of Arizona over a law enacted by the state legislature that simply - and almost completely - quotes and cites federal immigration law and requires peace officers in Arizona to also enforce those federal statutes during the routine course of responding to violations of other laws. (Contrary to what is commonly reported by liberal "journalists", this is not a license for policemen to stop a person who is not violating any other statute and ask for "their papers.")

We see congress seriously considering rewriting hundreds of years of case law regarding business and finance in a move to further fetter the freedom of economic markets that have brought the world its greatest wealth and prosperity in the history of the human race.

We can say that we're going to change things in November. We can say that we might even take away the statist control of the Congress. (NB: I did not say "Democrat control" because there are statists in the Republican party, too.)

So we take control of the Congress back for The People in November. The change won't take place until late January of 2011.  What legislation do you think is going to get passed in the intervening "lame duck" period? Look at what the statists have passed while purportedly worried about the chances of reelection! I really can't imagine what is coming down the proverbial pike.

I think we're in for quite an adventure. I'd like to see serious talk about repealing 100% of the legislation passed between 2007 and 2010! Consider each act on its own merits, and keep the ones that are good for the whole. Lose the rest!

If You Own One, You Know It's True...

Compensation And Newton's Third Law....

Newton's Third Law states roughly that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This is interesting to consider in light of the discussion on compensation we had earlier.

If I put energy into a good or service, that energy must be taken out of the universe at large - or very often, out of my own body.

If I receive monetary compensation, that money must be taken out of someone else's bank account.

If I pour a glass of orange juice, the glass becomes full only at the expense of the pitcher.

If I throw a ball into the air, the earth pulls it back to itself with exactly the same amount of energy I put into the ball in the first place - and not one bit more.

So, why does it not follow that when I do good, when I am kind, when I love somewhere else in the world I have caused a bad, and unkindness, or a hatred? Because Nature, the Universe - God - is an infinite source of virtue and goodness. When we act with virtuous intentions and do things that cause good in our lives, the lives of others, and the world at large, Natural virtue compensates Newton's Third Law and goodness and virtue are actually multiplied, and not negated.

This is not theory. Simply look around. Simply search your memory. When you let someone pull in front of you in traffic, how much delayed were you in getting to your destination? When someone smiled at you in the store, how much more suffering do you think they endured later in the day? When we stop to cheer a friend, do we find more sadness in our lives?

There are laws that seem to govern the world we see, such as Newton's Laws and the Laws of Thermodynamics. But there are other, higher laws that govern the universe of the soul. And the soul has so much to do with the world we see.

When, however, we act with malice, with selfish intent, in spite or hate, we cannot reap goodness in the long term. Certainly, we may experience a momentary and temporal increase. But the bad we have sown in the world will surely come back to us. When we profit at another's expense, when we advance by forcing another to revert, when we gratify ourselves while humiliating another, we will reap the whirlwind we have sown. The pleasure is compensated for by an equal amount of pain; the gain is compensated for by an equal amount of loss.

And in the end - and perhaps sooner than that - we will see the costs we've inflicted on others return to us multiplied.

In the Old Testament story of Samuel the prophet, Samuel is instructed to choose the next king of Israel from Jesse's sons. When he sees how strong and handsome Eliab is, Samuel says in his heart that he has found the man. The Lord reproaches him and reminds Samuel that "man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart."

Thus we see that God, Nature, the Universe, perceives our intentions, knows our struggles and our sorrows, understands our deepest desires, and passes perfect judgment. The law of compensation is based on this perfect insight and infinite discernment.

Thoughts On Compensation....

Compensation. It is a word with multiple meanings. Compensation can be pay, or a just reward for an action. Compensation can be a making up for a lack or weakness. Compensation can be a neutralization, such as an equal and opposite reaction to every action.

I think that the principle of Compensation is alive in the universe, in the world around us, and in our own individual lives. And I think that all three senses of the word mentioned above apply.

"Mythbusters" is a favorite television show in our house. In a recently screened episode the scientists worked to determine if two bodies (automobiles, in this case) colliding with eachother head-on, each traveling 50 mph resulted in a force equal to one car hitting a solid object (wall) at 100 mph. The initial thought was, yes, the forces would be cumulative. My intuition said the same thing.

However a small body of viewers asserted that the "equal and opposite" clause would result in a compensating force that would make the collision similar to a single car hitting a solid object at 50 mph.

They were correct. Nature compensated for the additional speed of impact and yielded a force that was equivalent to the second car, speeding at 50 mph into a head-on collision, simply standing still.

Our bodies compensate for weaknesses by developing dominant eyes, hands, feet, and brain hemispheres. We can compensate for an injury by using different muscles or body parts to perform routine tasks while we heal. Over the long term our bodies can alter their skeletal and muscular structure to compensate for and overcome permanent damage. I know a pilot who was shot down over North Viet Nam. While ejecting from his aircraft his back was broken in several places. Over years in a prison camp, without medical attention, the muscles along his spine grew stronger, providing support for the broken bones, until his bones fused back together.

In free market economies we see the price of labor, goods, and services rise or fall to their natural levels, with the producers of such resources compensated justly, or fairly for their added value. This happens without intervention by governments or other outside forces.

I think that there is also a metaphysical or spiritual law of compensation at work in the universe. The Preacher in Ecclesiastes said, "Cast thy bread upon the waters; for thou shalt find it after many days." In other words, we will reap what we sow in this world. The compensation may not be immediate; note the Preacher's use of the words "after many days." But it is sure.

And I don't think that needs to be a scary thing. In fact, it ought to be a hopeful and a happy thing for us. To know that Nature and the Universe are aware of the things we do, the thoughts we have, the hopes we carry in our hearts; and that They will compensate us for them, help us see them to fruition, give us the end product of them should give us great encouragement.

As Saint James taught, as surely as a fig tree bears figs, or an olive tree bears olives, we can be assured that our thoughts and hopes and wishes for good in the world will lead to good in the world and to our compensation with good in our lives.

And just as a tree cannot bear fruit without first producing a blossom, so we must produce that first blossom of goodness if we wish to see goodness return to us. Yet the fruit tree does not bloom of its own accord. The tree blossoms because Nature made it possible and Nature endowed it with the power to bloom. So with us; we cannot do good of our own power, but Nature has given us Its power to do good, and when we use the power for good that Nature bestowed on us we can hope for the eventual return of goodness' fruit to us in our lives.

Even the thought, or the desire is sufficient for us to begin to reap the benefit of goodness. And as we reap that benefit and feel its influence in our lives we come to know that the law of compensation is working for us. And we often come to desire more good, hence we do more good, hence we reap more good.

The cycle of virtue and goodness in the universe is an encouraging one. It is a hopeful one. It is one that shows a pattern to follow that has the ultimate potential of curing all the world's ills. As we think and act in goodness toward others, it tempers them and leads them to think and act in goodness toward yet others. And so on, and so on, until neighborhoods are changed, then communities are changed, then cities, then states, then entire nations are affected by goodness to act in goodness and virtue one with another.

You may say I'm a dreamer; but I'm not the only one. I hope one day you will join us, and the world will live as one.

A Link From My Liberal Aunt and Some Thoughts...

Here's a link to an article my aunt sent to me today.  You all (left and right) should find this disturbing and very educational.  It's long, but not boring.

http://daviddegraw.org/2010/06/af-pak-war-racket-the-obama-illusion-comes-crashing-down/

This is what the right wing kooks like Glenn Beck and the others who were derided as "haters" have been saying since the campaign. President Obama is disingenuous at best, and an out and out liar at worst. He is not the man he wants us to believe he is.

He is nothing that he and the cooperative "mainstream" media portrayed him to be - an anti-war proletariat, a common man, a poor kid from a single-parent home who pulled himself up by the bootstraps - a sort of snapshot of America. He's none of those things. It can't even be argued effectively that he is an environmentalist.

He is changing the future of the country, setting it on a more left-leaning track with his appointments of judges and sponsorship of legislation that stifles the (illusion of) free markets in America. His antagonistic attitude toward business and contracts (bonuses on Wall Street and General Motors) has made America a less stable (more like Venezuela or China) place to do business because contracts may or may not be upheld by the state.

George Bush's bailout of Wall Street was a travesty that some may still argue was necessary, but it was a gigantic lurch to the left. The debt alone from that one act was enough to mortgage the future of the next two generations of Americans. Now we face litterally TRILLIONS MORE in debt that economists agree will NEVER be paid off because it is impossible to do so without completely dismantling the country.

Obama is a pawn to the same people that George Bush, Bill Clinton, and Bush Sr. were pawns to - the military-industrial complex and its masters. He's just not smart enough to know that, 18 months late, we've figured it out. Or he's too arrogant in his power to care.

I take no satisfaction in seeing this. I had hoped that he would be a leader. A real leader. Who would guide us through the last struggles of racial animosity and who would be diplomatic enough to maintain our friendships in the world, and heal the rough relationships we've developed in the past 20 years. I had hoped that he would be good for our country on both domestic and foreign fronts.

He's been disappointing to me most of the time, and scarry to me other times.

And the fact that our CONGRESS and SUPREME COURT allow this sort of behavior to continue makes me really worried. What happened to the checks and balances? It seems we've given away so many of them because it seemed like a good idea at the time, that we don't have many left. When congress gave George Bush (the presidency) war powers, it was a clear violation of the Constitution. But it seemed like a good idea to everyone (including Hillary Clinton) at the time. Now we see that a new president lacks the self control to give those powers back to the congress, and the congress lacks the spine to take them.

But still, the press gives this president a pass. Look at the BP disaster! This happened under an administration that actually had control of the industry!

George Bush was crucified for his bungling of Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. No federal agency had control over hurricanes or what path they were allowed to take. That disaster was almost entirely an act of God, as the insurance agency puts it. The only part government had was to neglect the dikes around the city and to give misinformation and incorrect instructions regarding evacuation. Nature started the disaster and government compounded the effects. (Why do we trust these people with our retirement savings and our healthcare?)

No one even dares to suggest that the Obama administration was so cozy with Big Oil that they turned a blind eye to the built-in problems that led to this mess. The Obama Minerals Management Service was asleep at the wheel. Some would argue that they were literally in bed with the companies they were supposed to be regulating. And his personal response time and obvious lack of engagement are pathetic. But he's discussed as "cool" and "reflective" and he's given the excuse that the presidency really doesn't have the skill or the tools to actually go and stop the leak. Few will point out that the Dutch oil skimming ships that could have saved billions of dollars and millions of sea creatures were kept out of US waters by the Obama EPA because they might not have captured 100% of the oil they skimmed out of the Gulf of Mexico. (Isn't any amount better than nothing?!)

Escalating the wars to points beyond those of President Bush, without any end in sight and, in fact, no visible progress in a year and a half has to be disappointing to many who elected President Obama. Although, in his defense, the president is consistent as he continues to show the contempt for the American fighting man that he did during the campaign. However, increasing the use of military contractors is an interesting inconsistency, as he was so adamantly opposed to their presence in war theaters during the campaign.

My bottom line is this: I hope that President Obama can pull his head out, get his act together, find the nerve to govern the country for the good of the country, and start to show some real leadership. I believe this will be difficult for him to do, as he has subjected himself to high doses of revolutionary rhetoric, low doses of reality, and has no moral compass. By that, I mean that he is a person who does not have a strong internal sense of what he believes is right and wrong. He is not guided by any principle that comes from a source higher than his own mind. Most of us have a moral compass that is informed by our belief systems, be they environmental, theological, or cosmic. President Obama is a firm believer in man, and man alone. That means that as man's society evolves, so does the value set that guides man's behavior. In other words, his belief system is laid on shifting sands.

The Tea Party movement is an interesting thing. In most cases, I believe that the people who participated in those rallies in 2009 were not saying that we needed a "third party". They were saying that today's Republicans and today's Democrats are essentially the same party, beholden to the same powers - the military-industrial complex, if you will. They were saying that we need a real SECOND party!

I agree. If the Republicans want to step up and be the ones who say "enough is enough", then they'll have my vote. If the Democrats are the first ones to do it, they'll have the same.  And if no existing party does, I'll be tempted to give - and will seriously consider giving - my vote to a third party.  After all, if the two traditional parties are esentially the same, then the "throwing away your vote" argument doesn't hold much sway.

Democrat Congressman. In Touch With The Common Man...

Oh, don't forget that he has your interest at heart and will compassionately stand between you and your greedy health care provider ensuring you are treated in just the way you deserve!

Unbelievable that we trust these egos to do anything right, let alone to do the right thing....

No Cla#%!...

Okay, I'll weigh in on the President's recent use of coarse language on a morning talk show.

I think it was not classy and showed Mr. Obama's continuing ability to grasp neither the true role of the president nor the part the presidency can play in being a unifying force to focus diverse groups' energies on solving problems.

BP Gusher In Gulf of Mexico...

I was just watching the live camera feed of the broken deepwater oil well head in the Gulf of Mexico.  BP is trying desperately to cap the well or to stop its flow.  On the surface hundreds of boats and thousands of people are trying to contain the oil that is escaping.

And a thought occurred to me:  Man! The earth seems almost desperate to give us that oil.  There's no hint of scarcity in the rate at which the oil is gushing out of that well head.  It's almost like mankind is supposed to have oil and to use it to improve the quality of our life. 

A Poem Read To Me On An Airplane This Week...

I had a strange and wonderful conversation with a man who made me comfortable and, at the same time, uncomfortable on an airplane this week. 

In the course of our discussion he paused and asked if I liked poetry.  I told him I did and he asked if I would mind if he read me a poem.  I told him I would like that. 

(What else do you say to a man who asks you if he can read you a poem on an airplane when he is in the aisle seat and you are by the window?)

I thought this was a beautiful poem.  It spoke to me.  I'm not sure of everything it said to me, but I felt like I could understand a little.  And that perhaps the author understood me a little, too.

The House of Belonging

I awoke
this morning
in the gold light
turning this way
and that

thinking for
a moment
it was one
day
like any other.

But
the veil had gone
from my
darkened heart
and I thought

it must have been the quiet
candlelight
that filled my room,

it must have been
the first easy rhythm
with which I breathed
myself to sleep,

it must have been
the prayer I said
speaking to the otherness
of the night.

And
I thought
this is the good day
you could meet your love,

this is the black day
someone close
to you could die.

This is the day
you realize
how easily the thread
is broken
between this world
and the next

and I found myself
sitting up
in the quiet pathway
of light,

the tawny
close grained cedar
burning round
me like a fire
and all the angels of this housely
heaven ascending
through the first
roof of light
the sun has made.

This is the bright home
in which I live,
this is where
I ask
my friends
to come,
this is where I want
to love all the things
it has taken me so long
to learn to love.

This is the temple
of my adult aloneness
and I belong
to that aloneness
as I belong to my life.

There is no house
like the house of belonging.

~ David Whyte ~

Why Law?...

Frederic Bastiat said that the purpose of Law - and by extension, Government - is to do nothing except to secure citizens in their persons, liberty, and property, and to prevent injustice.

Can you imagine a country where that was the case? 

One Argument For Marriage...

Here's an interesting note.

Being in a family where your parents are married to each other is good for children under 5 years of age in at least one way: they are less likely to live in poverty.

Just over 8.5% of children whose parents are married live in poverty, while more than 43% of children in single parent homes live in poverty in the US. 

Single-parent families are 5 times more likely to raise their small children in poverty.  And the figures are similar for children ages 5 to 17. 

Sad....


http://www.naccrra.org/randd/docs/Children_under_5_in_poverty.pdf

National Head Start Spending

In 2009, the Department of Health and Human Services (federal welfare) spent $9,213,000,000 on the National Head Start program.  This spending was independent from state-funded programs and full-day kindergarten programs. 

In 2008 there were 796,740 children enrolled in nationally funded head start programs in America. 

That works out to $11,563 per child per year. 

If Head Start runs 180 days per year, like public school, then we are spending $64 per child per day.  If a family has 2 children in the program, that is $128 per day, or $540 per week, or $23,127 per year. 

Why not just send the family a check that would cover the rent on a very nice 3 bedroom apartment in the amount of $1,927 per month? 

Heck, if the family moved into a more modest home that amount would cover rent and groceries!  A single parent would be able to work a part time job and provide plenty for their family.  A two-parent household could easily afford to have Mom home and Dad could work a job that allowed him to be home more hours, too.  Or the parent(s) could devote some time and energy to education or vocational training that would allow them to become more independent and to enjoy the sense of self-worth and well-being that comes with providing for a family.

Let's dismantle the Head Start program and send each child currently enrolled in the program a check for $11,563 per year for the next 4 years.  Make it a one-time grant to the child in the interest of getting their parents trained, educated and productive. 

Ah, but then the State would not have so much access to young minds and so much control over families as it now has.  The the State would lose its hold on the future of its citizens.  Then the State would see its power slip from its hands, back into the hands of those who rightfully hold it:  The People.

And I see the flaw in my premise.  My premise assumes that government can legitimately take money from those who have and redistribute it to those who have less.  That right does not exist in Nature.  Government can only do that which the people delegate to it.  And the people can delegate to government only rights which they hold.  No person has the right to take from one the fruits of his labor and give those fruits to another simply on the basis that the latter has less than the former.  Therefore it is not in the legitimate scope of government to do the same. 

Nevertheless, it is interesting to imagine all of the government spending in "our interest" really being spent in our interest, isn't it?

http://www.hhs.gov/asrt/ob/docbudget/2011budgetinbrief.pdf
http://www.naccrra.org/randd/head-start/participation

Fatherhood...(dot gov???)

Yesterday I was driving and I heard a public service announcement on the radio.  I can't remember what it was saying, but the tone was sappy, sentimental and sincere. 

At the end of the spot, a voice said  I should visit http://www.fatherhood.gov/ for more information. 

That almost made my head spin around. 

I'm not opposed to learning truth from all sources, but it seems that intimate family relationships and anything ending in ".gov" are incompatible; and in today's reality they are diametrically opposed.

The proper function of government is to protect the individual liberties of citizens.

Some say that the Tea Party movement in America is misguided or misinformed.  They assert that the original Boston Tea Party was a protest against taxes.  They are the ones who misunderstand history and who seek to perpetuate misinformation.

The original movement toward American independence from British rule was inspired by the natural desire of mankind to be free from tyranny of any kind.  Britain had steadily ratcheted up its influence in North America and its control over its subjects living in the New World for more than 100 years.  The Crown had imposed laws and ignored them when it was in the Crown's interest to do so.  The influence of government (distinct from "law") could be seen and felt in virtually every aspect of American life.  Consider the Bill of Rights.  Why would the founders have written the clause about housing soldiers in private homes without compensation or cause if there hadn't been some kind of problem with that?

Government's place is to uphold the Law of the land, not to seek to influence or control the citizenry.  The Law, civil society, religion, and individual morality will control the citizenry.

Gadsden's flag bore the imgage of a coiled rattlesnake and the words, "Don't Tread On Me!"  The implied message was that if would-be tyrants stepped on the American people they would receive a wound that could be fatal. 

So, back to Boston.  The original tea party was simply a venting of frustration with the overreaching and oppressive hand of the British government.  Taxes were at best a secondary issue. 

So it is today.  The modern Tea Party movement is an expression of frustration with the US government.  So-called "Tea Partiers" do not want a revolution.  Rather they seek a reformation of the country.  A return to the limited government that allowed Americans to exercise their natural rights to life, liberty and property. 

Some, like Bill Maher, would twist this desire for true freedom and accuse "Tea Partiers" of longing for a time in American history when racism was institutionalized.  They would have others believe that the movement for restored freedom is simply a frustrated and angry white person's reaction to a black president.  This thought is simplistic at best and malicious at worst. 

This simply is not true.

The Tea Party movement began before President Obama was elected.  It began before any of the participants were even born.  It began before 1776 and before 1621.  It began before Jesus was born.  It began before cavemen and dinosaurs. 

This is a truth that those who would oppress their fellow man seek deep to hide from the world. 

Nature and Nature's God designed and destined man to be free to enjoy life, liberty and the fruits of his labor.  It is a violation of Natural Law to oppress man or to take the fruits of his labor without his consent and without just compensation. 

Whether a man is hanged with a silken rope or one of coarse hemp, the end is the same.  Whether government interference in the life of man is well-intentioned or nefarious, the result is the same. 

Which brings me back to fatherhood.gov.  On its face it is preposterous.  And it disturbs me.

Is Health Care Reform Constitutional? It Doesn't Matter...!

In memoriam of the US Constitution I am linking to this interesting exchange between an Illinois representative to the US House of Representatives and some of his constituents.

http://qconline.com/archives/qco/display_mobile.php?id=486688

This is a perfect example of two things.  First, a liberal will always put feeling before reason.  And second, some members of Congress do not engage in independent thought, and when pressed they cannot speak intelligently or honestly.

My Thoughts on Health Care Reform and the Future...

So, what's my take on the health care reform act?

It alone has fundamentally changed the US Government's approach to individual liberties.  Combined with the enormous expansions of government power and involvement in the business sector such as TARP, financial and industrial bailouts, the voiding of contracts by interfering in private citizens' compensation on bonuses, and the regulation of a harmless naturally occurring gas, this could signal the end of Americanism.

"Are you crazy?!" you say.  "That's just a little extreme, I think!"

No.  That's not extreme.  That's clear. 

The beginning of the end of Americanism began almost before the ink was dry on the Constitution.  But the American people and the system of government they had established were resilient, aware, and active enough to resist the pressure to change.  For nearly a century the country remained as the founders intended it.  Then the Civil War or War Between the States changed forever the way Americans viewed themselves.  For the first time there was a strong federal government and the people were okay with that.  They were, after all, Unionists - Americans - and not Vermonters, Michiganders, or citizens of other states. 

Since then the federal government has expanded its power and influence over states and individuals.  Don't misunderstand this to be some pro-slavery, anti-government rant.  I'm just talking you through the progression of things.

Sometimes the federal government has used courts to interpret the laws to give it more power than it previously had.  Sometimes the government has used constitutional amendments to do the same.  Sometimes it has used financial coercion - either the threat of withholding funding or the promise of providing funds - to subdue the states.

Now we see the threat of federal retribution delivered at a personal and individual level.  Should I choose not to take the advice of the federal government as it relates to my family's health care I am subject to a personal fine of up to 2% of my income. 

Why is the fine related to my income and not held at some rationally calculated number? 

Anyway, let me get back to the progressive loss of individual liberties. 

While there is not a solid government or public option for health care coverage in the current act, that will not be far away.  After all, how can the government order all citizens to purchase something.  And how can they continue to require that purchase with the cost of coverage spiraling out of control?  Isn't it only right that the government provide an affordable option for people to buy into so that they can have at least some level of coverage?  Think of the children who will suffer most from their parents' inability to pay the premiums demanded by these greedy insurance companies.  It's only right....

And so, we sign onto the government option.  Which really is no option at all in just a few years.  It soon becomes the only game in town. 

And the government administrators and actuaries do the math.  People who engage in risky lifestyles will have to pay more because they have more health problems.  Interestingly, "risky" will not include the consumption of alcohol or promiscuous behavior.  But those who eat fatty foods, those who choose not to exercise, and those who drive their own cars, rather than take public transit, will be charged more for their health coverage.  After all, they're the ones who consume most of the resources.  It's only right....

And "risky" won't stop there.  It will extend to other areas. 

And you may say, "Yeah, but those things are just good sense."  You may be right, but remember that Natural Law gives the individual liberties that are not restricted by what you may think is "good sense". 

And America and Americanism were founded on Natural Law; the primacy of the individual being the foundation of the country.  We live now in an age where most Americans accept the premise of primacy of the state, or the idea that the interests of the state are superior to the interests of the individual. 

We must return to the basis of our country's founding before it is too late.  And, given the track record of repealing entitlement programs, I am worried that it IS too late.  But we must not go quietly into that dark night.  We must go down swinging.  In November of this year we have an opportunity to change the composition of the US Congress.  We must send representatives and senators who are committed to repealing this one act and to setting our country's house in order.

Liberal Bloggers Expose the Truth About Health Care Reform...

It seems to me that the President would have Americans believe that the right wing extremists in the country are distorting the truth about his health care reform act.

Here are some figures and "fact checking" from the left.  Fire Dog Lake is a fairly "progressive" blog and they've done some interesting research. 

Strangely, they came to the same conclusions the far right did regarding the negative impact of the act. 

In a court of law, if two witnesses recount the same series of events, and only one contradicts them, the stories that agree are lent more credibility than the one "outlier".  It seems that the President's story is the outlier in this case. 

But read the article and let me know your take....

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/03/19/fact-sheet-the-truth-about-the-health-care-bill/