Don't Tread On Me

Dealing With Ignorance

You know, it is very difficult to deal with rumors. I feel confident that anybody intelligent enough to surf to this blog has lived enough life to understand what I'm talking about.

Perception is reality. Especially in the political world.

I go from link to link, blog to blog, and I keep running into this moronic myth. It doesn't seem to matter if it is a conservative or liberal blog, but this most damnable concept keeps getting promulgated by the most well meaning souls.

As an aside, let me just say that George Orwell was a prophet, par excellance because he understood the nature of language and its affect on people. If you redefine terms in a slow and subtle way, you really can influence people. He was trying to warn us of the danger of how those who seek and seize power would convince us that it was all for our own good.

First of all, no individual, no citizen has a right to vote on who the president of the USA is going to be. Ah, Ah, Ah, . . . before you start fussing and fuming, pull out your copy of the constitution and read it thoroughly.

Pay attention boys and girls, the president is elected by an electoral college of delegates. An ingenious method to make sure that popular vote by more populated urban centers could not dominate and squelch the rights and the voice of more agrarian and rural areas and states.

The constitution was written to allow States to choose their own method of selecting delegates to represent their own best interests in selecting a federal president. Any state legislature could pass a law that deemed the selection of their delegates to the electoral college in any manner they see fit.

Let's dispense with another awful, horrible, nightmarish idea. This country was not designed to be a democracy.

Don't just parrot the stupid crap you were told in the government propaganda centers ("Public Schools"), show me one mention of "democracy" in the founding documents. Read the Federalist Papers. Nothing good said about democracy. My favorite line from Mel Gibson's "The Patriot": "Why would I trade one tyrant 2000 miles away for 2000 tyrants one mile away?"

"Certain unalienable rights" can only be assured with a CONSTITUTIONAL republic. A democracy is a sure way to tyranny of mob rule.

The founders, by their own writings, envisioned a weak federal government that only served to protect the interests of several states when necessary, in the affairs of international issues and in settling minor disputes between the several states.

No Where To Hide

I would bet that if you only had that title, given recent events, you would think this post was about the capture of Hussein.

Nope. This is in response to the reactions -- as in mixing baking soda and vinegar, or lye and sulphuric acid -- by the Angry Left (Democrat(ic) Underground).

Some reactions are so unbelievable. DU has to sometimes go in and edit or erase some of them before they become too widespread, like being quoted verbatim by Neal Boortz and Rush Limbaugh. I did manage to get some from Right Wing News, and here are just a few:

· To me, it's obvious that Bush is far more dangerous than Saddam Hussein, especially if he has another four years to destroy my country by trying to transform the republic into an empire.

· The benefits of capturing Saddam seem vastly outweighed by the increased danger posed by Bush insofar as Bush's reelection chances are enhanced by the capture.

· In my view, what is good for GW Bush politically is almost necessarily bad for America and the world.
I also think that it is absurd to allow one's feelings for the troops -- who voluntarily chose to join America's hyper-aggressive war-machine -- to determine one's analysis of policy.

· The timing of this thing just seems way too convenient. Bush, down in the polls - having to face questions not just about the war but also about the economy and our international standing. Dean, riding high, starting to attract the NASCAR dads the media thinks are the key to this election. Even Bush's media events are torn to pieces as the shams they are.

· Then suddenly, we *find* Sadaam Hussein. Trot him out as a spectacle for the Roman masses, throw his generals to the lions and look into the corner to see if Emperor Georgie gives him a thumbs up or thumbs down....

· If you have any respect for international law, you'd be against Saddam's capture. He may be an evil man but he should be allowed to run his country the way he wishes to run it.

· If you're happy about his capture...you are pretty much happy that we had the war (we wouldn't have captured him otherwise).

· There is NO good from this war...only suffering.

· Bush could cure cancer and I'd still hate him.

· The Iraqi people had to live under Husseine and now they are worse off with Bush. I'm sorry for the American people who have to live under Bush. I'm pissed.

But one particular reason the left likes to throw out there really stirs something in me. It isn't just that Bush is a Cowboy. I take that as a compliment. It's that they view him as a vigilante. An outlaw.

How dare he not get permission from the UN!

This is what is so confusing about the Angry Left. This is what leads to conspiracy theories. Maybe you've heard of the "loyal opposition." It's the "good-cop-bad-cop" scenario, only multiplied. It works even better, because everything the establishment democrats do is anathema to the Right Wing, and everything the establishment Republicans do is anathema to the Left Wing.

The useful idiots of the left wing, the ultra left, protest everything that is capitalistic, and they throw around terms they don't understand and can't define (e.g. facist, racist, Nazi, conservative, democratic, etc.) In fact, to use logic in debating a subject makes you a racist or a conservative or a Nazi, in their eyes. To the left, when the government is in the hands of their opposition, it is Hitler's Germany. To many on the Right, when Democrats are in charge, they are working hard to make us a socialist nanny state. Which is correct.
And don't bother pointing out any hypocrisy. I am biased. I was raised in a family of "progressive" democrats. I'm like David Horowitz.

But there's more to it than that. I know for many of you everything in this post up to this point is old, old news. I needed to do an intro into my main point. That being; the move toward One World Government is really a serious problem.

When I was a kid, there was still a lot of anxiety about the Cold War (WWIII), and the possibility of nuclear holocaust on a global scale. This caused a lot of people to think seriously about their mortality and eschatology (the study of end of the world prophecy). When I was a teenager and heard Christians talk about one man rising up to control the whole world, and that no one would be able to trade without special permission, it just seemed so ludicrous.

But we didn't have the internet, or microtechnology, wireless phones, satellites that can count the dimples on a golf ball from space. Computers that process trillions of calculations per second. Nanotechnology in which circuits can be built not from etching on silicon wafers, but by placing individual atoms onto "circuit boards" hundreds of times smaller than we have now.

Ted Kazcinski was an insane genius. I think he knew where this was heading. Like in the movie, "Enemy of the State." (Interesting side note: If you watch the movie, pay close attention to the scene where Gene Hackman's character pulls up the computer identity of the evil NSA director, played by Jon Voight. Note the date of birth)

I've been watching this "frog-in-the-pot" syndrome for some time now. It really scares me how people love all their new gadgets and technology and completely disregard the danger that it represents. I recall the time I saw a commercial where a shady looking young guy walks into a grocery store and blatantly walks down the aisle stuffing items under his trench coat, then walks right past the "detectors" and just outside the door the security guard stops him; "You forgot your receipt."

The purpose of the commercial? To get us ready for the day when some chip is going to on our person that will allow us to enter a store, be immediately identified, scan and track everything we buy, deduct the amount automatically from our personal bank account, and we should just be soooooo happy about the convenience.

Think about it. If it is a chip, a piece of hardware, the only way to make it nearly impossible to steal would be implanting it in your body. However that's not foolproof because

First Amendment Death

The Spoons Experience makes it rather clear that Americans are not paying attention and don't really care that they are becoming slaves to an oligarchy. I would comment more, but, what's the point?

How did we get here?

Those of us who watch films like, "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson, or read the Constitution and the Federalist Papers and then want to go out and find the first Donk we can get our hands on and tie them to a chair so they can be forced to listen to recordings of the early writings of the American Founders, can get a great boost to our morale by going to read the Imperial Curmudgeon's site, especially the one dated 12/09/03. You can get to the basic link by clicking here. and select the title Fragmentations (yes, I corrected it).

If it seems like too long a read for you, you are probably too young to appreciate it or you think history is boring, blah, blah, blah. Stupid morons. Frank is offering you an extremely valuable and free lesson about what could cause you to be enslaved. Don't take it lightly.

It's Ten O'clock . . .

. . . Do You Know Where Your Tax Money Is?

The following is part of the Federalist Digest 03-50 that comes in my email. I tried to figure out a way to link to it. Think about what you could do with this money.

Pork Lotto Winners in the just-passed omnibus spending bill. "The number of pork projects skyrocketed from under 2,000 five years ago to 9,362 in the 2003 budget," noted Heritage Foundation researchers Brian Riedl and Thomas Roe. To wit, here are a few of our favorites. (We searched and searched but could find nothing in our nation's Constitution authorizing any of these expenditures. In fact, that venerable old document's primary author, James Madison, once proclaimed, "I cannot undertake to
lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents....")

$400,000 Speed Art Museum -- just made a fast buck!
$2,000,000 First Tee program -- next year it will be the
second tee!
$270,000 Sustainable olive production -- way to go Popeye!
$725,000 Please Touch Museum -- (insert your own joke here)
$5,000,000 Kennedy Center/Potomac River Pedestrian and Bike Path
-- hope there are no narrow bridges!
$400,000 Davenport Music History Museum -- Davenport always
comes to mind when we think of Music
$1,800,000 2003 Women's World Cup Tournament -- something to do
with java?
$5,000,000 Project SOCRATES -- next, project Hippocrates
$500,000 Traffic Signal Replacement Program -- with what,
crossing guards?
$2,000,000 Parents Anonymous -- aren't there already enough
of these?
$600,000 Web Wise Kids -- cuz they aint larnin nuthn in skoo.
$800,000 Mammoth (Lakes) Bus Purchase -- it's a big one!
$1,400,000 Translational Genomics Research Institute -- what?
$450,000 Johnny Appleseed Heritage Center, Inc. -- bet the pie
is good!
$750,000 Intelligent Transportation Systems -- then why do they
need my money?
$1,500,000 Operation Streetsweeper -- cleaned up on this one!
$500,000 Bike path, St. Petersburg, Florida -- isn't that special!
$450,000 Trout Genome Mapping -- improved fish sticks!
$500,000 LOVE Social Services -- what the world needs now!
$750,000 Broken Bow rail spur -- that's going to require surgery!
$2,000,000 Tools for Tolerance program, California -- wonder
what they will be "tolerating"?
[That’s a total of $27,795,000]

And last, one expenditure that all Federalists can agree on:
$400,000 for the National Center for American Revolution.

Tea Party, anyone?

Now stop and think a bit more on something in that first paragraph. They only listed 22 items out of the more than 9 thousand items identified as pork barrel programs. And the reason these politicians can get away with this is because the vast majority of Americans are more interested in bread and circuses; What's going on with the NFL, or NHL, or NBA, or Entertainment Tonight, or People Magazine.

A country gets the government they deserve. Go subscribe to the Federalist Digest: http://Federalist.com

More on Democracy

If you read my previous post "Are We a Democracy?" You should find this post a useful addendum.

I am much disappointed with the devolution of our language. While taking a sign language class as part of my humanities requirements at college, the instructor was answering a question about difficulties in translating. One sentence in her lengthy answer has always stuck with me. All language tends toward laziness. How profound. How true. I'm going to address that in more detail in another post, but it really does apply to this post as well.

If you go read history as written by its contemporaries, you often discover that their definition of a word does not fit the modern one. And sometimes, terms get used incompletely or new things or situations or inventions arise that require new words. You can't read a play by Shakespear and find the word radio or light bulb. The word Dinosaur can't be found in the Bible because the word wasn't coined until the 19th century. But words change their meaning over time as well. I won't go into all the examples, unless you ask me to.

Definitions for words in a recent dictionary can be very different from a dictionary published before 1960 or even 1970. Recently, read a piece at Townhall.com in which the word "ochlocracy" was used because the author wanted no vagueness. Here it is:

och·loc·ra·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k-lkr-s)
n. pl. och·loc·ra·cies
Government by the masses; mob rule.

Now here is the definition of:

de·moc·ra·cy P Pronunciation Key (d -m k r -s )
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
4. Majority rule.
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

This is what you call a distinction without a difference. And that last line? (emphasis mine) Is just so much garbage. In a pure democracy, the majority doesn't care a whit about your individuality.

The definition given for a republic isn't all that much better. Dictionary.com basically defines it as only representative rule. But, you see, that does not accurately describe the original form of government created for the United States. We are a Constitutional Republic. That modifier is essentially important. The founders wrote much (Federalist Papers) to convince a well educated populace that the purpose of the constitution was to put heavy chains on the power of the Federal government. To ensure to the people and their state governments that freedom would be guaranteed by iron fetters on the federal system.

When you look at how many end runs have been made around the First Amendment (McCain-Fiengold), 2nd Amendment (20,000+ laws! What the hell part of "right of the people . . . shall not be infringed", don't you understand? BTW, go look up the word "infringed."), The Fourth Amendment (confiscate cash or property via drug laws), Fifth Amendment (outrageous abuse of emminent domain; e.g. seizing peoples homes to build a Walmart in Alabaster, AL) and The Tenth Amendment (abusing the commerce clause to override practically any state laws due to "compelling interest"), it seems pretty clear that we've come a long way, baby.

Are We (U.S.A.) a democracy?

Have you ever read the book Animal Farm? Have you watched the movie?

George Orwell was living under the rise of Communism, and his writings serve to demonstrate that nothing in human nature ever really changes. Especially the efforts of those who want to enslave the masses.

There are two basic methods for gaining control over a society. The Mao Tse Dong method: "All power flows from the barrel of a gun." or the slow method of indoctrination. You know, "Frog in the pot."

While the Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, method is quickly and easily recognized, the "Frog in the Pot" method is not. At least not to the dumb-masses. This is why the book animal farm needs to be read by every sovereign citizen even though less than 50% will understand it because of our "free" "public" (government) education system.

It all starts with language. Whoever gains the perceived authority to define the terms, wins the battle. It is the first rule of psychological warfare. If I can make you attach a certain meaning to the words I use, then I have more than won the battle. If I control the definition of the terms. I control the conversation. This has been used by cults for millenia.

Is the U.S.A. a democracy? It very nearly is. It is holding out by a tiny thread. When it truly becomes a democracy, all hope for saving this country will be lost. Game over.

Some of you are simply aghast. "What the hell is he talking about?!!"

Glad you asked. Let's take a look at the dictionary. Let's actually think about what words really mean. This reminds me of a commercial where a guy with an MBA is recruited by the office manager to help get shipments out, and he protests to doing work he thinks is "beneath" him by saying, "You don't understand, I have an MBA." The response is priceless, "Oh. . . Yeah . . . I guess I'll have to explain it to you."

If you think we are supposed to be a democracy, you are like the "educated-beyond-your-intelligence" MBA.

Before you click your mouse in a huff. I challenge you to find anything in our government documents prior to the FDR administration that refer to this country as a democracy. Go ahead. You can always come back here later.

But you won't come back with any evidence. We were formed as a republic, and while that does provide for representation of the common people, it completely negates that the majority can or should be allowed to impose its will on the rest of society or the minority. In the Federalist Papers, the founding fathers made it very clear that we were not a democracy. A democracy doesn't need a constitution. Whatever the majority wants becomes law. If the majority wants to be able to beat women in the streets for showing too much skin, that's the law. If the majority is so stupid to allow searches, wiretapping, and intimidation because the majority doesn't want the possibility of another terrorist attack, the minority just needs to shut up and take it.

Wake up! The Constitution was written for the express purpose of protecting the smallest minority, the individual from being trampled by an irrational, or panicked majority. The Bill of Rights says that Congress cannot infringe, cannot touch, cannot restrict my RIGHT to possess or carry firearms. Yet we have allowed such infringments. The First amendment guarantees my right to speak publically about any political or other issue, but McCain Fiengold squelches that right. I could go on and on through examples of assaults on the Bill of Rights.

We are not a democracy just quite yet, but if we become one, I will look to emmigrate to a third world country. Unless of course, I see a response by enough REAL Americans who are willing to stand up and take this country back from the "democrats" and the democrat lite "republicans."