iPandora

Myth, Power, and Deception in American History

There is supposed to be a tension between the government and the people.

I worded it that way on purpose, there is no “it’s people” with the government of the United States. There is supposed to be a tension between the government of the United States of America and the citizens of the United States of America.

The United States of America is unique in that respect among nations. While all governments are responsible and accountable for their actions for and on behalf of their citizens, the United States of America is unique among nations in that, at least in the founding documents and according to common belief, it affirms that accountability and responsibility.

The government of the United States of America has traveled far from it’s original constitutional moorings, and it is important that We the people not forget the correct alignment of the spheres of responsibility in a worthwhile culture.

I don’t follow some of Judge Andrew Napolitano’s ideas and philosophies, but my disagreements are more in details than in nature and essence, and in principle there is truly little I can disagree with.

It is a sad thing when even people who firmly believe in the original intent and the founding essence of the United States of America feel sick when they recognize the truth of where we are versus where we believed, hoped, and honestly thought we were.

And it is a good thing when someone stands up and courageously tells the truth without pulling punches.

Lies the Government Told You should be required reading before election day, before tax day, anytime we hear “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

The tension between We the People of the United States of America and the government of the United States of America is necessary and the superior strength and push should always come from We the People because the government attracts to itself people with the lust to dominate.

And it’s the power and pressure of the people who are the first, the last, and the only bulwark against the tyrants, petty and powerful, soft tongued and flagrant.

So purchase Judge Andrew Napolitano’s book Lies the Government Told You, and let’s put the government of the United States of America back in it’s place, back on it’s heels, back on it’s butt, back on it’s back, until its submission to We the People is total and complete.

Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich

Don’t you wish sometimes you could lie, cheat, steal, deal underhandedly, and in general act immorally in order to accomplish what you thought was best in this world?

I do.

With the state of our nation and it’s populace, lies are more believed than the truth. So if I could lie to protect unborn babies, if I could cheat to lower taxes, if I could steal to keep the government within it’s areas of legitimate responsibility.

Sometimes I just wish I could.

But I can’t.

Senator Kennedy has died . . . and all I can say is what a relief for the country.

Sure, he is being labeled as one of the best Senators at working across the isle. Sure he is being called an advocate of the poor and needy (Do they really need another advocate? What about an advocate for the middle class?), but does any of that really overshadow his moral bankruptcy and the political corruption that some called “savvy”?

If I might remind you, Senator Kennedy “forgot” to tell authorities that he was driving the car when it fell off the bridge with a girl inside (Anyone remember the bumper stickers that said “My guns has killed less people that Senator Kennedy’s car”?), he screwed intern in the back of restaurants, and most recently he called for the rules regarding his replacement be changed . . . after he had changed them to their current standard in 2005.

Yes, Senator Kennedy did so, so, so much to help the poor and needy? But did he do it for them, or to secure his political future (the vote)? Yes, Senator Kennedy did so much good, but did he ever resolve that he was a lying perverted cheat who was charged with manslaughter?

Actually, even though I believe that he should have been disqualified for public office, he doesn’t have to resolve the lying perverting cheater part with us . . . he is now before a much larger judge . . . with a case that I am afraid he will lose.

So, now we are approached with the “icon” label . . . but is he an icon to the Kopechne family . . . among others (read about the rape incidents by his nephew that took place at his home). What really makes Senator Kennedy an icon? Fighting the war in Iraq so that millions of people could remain in a tyrannical dictatorship, being unable to do his job but refusing to resign, changing laws to fit his political needs?

Wait, I think I may have to recant my statement. Let us label Senator Kennedy as an icon. Let us proclaim his as the leader, the head, the top gun. That is right, Senator Kennedy is iconic of our legislative system and our representatives (not all of them, just too many of them).

I will let Senator Kennedy be an icon, he just will not be my icon. He will not represent me. He has his place in our history . . . but his story ends there. His only legacy is one echoed by corruption in Washington, by tears in Chappaquiddick, and the groans of the middle class.

…is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.
~Thomas Sowell

On a recent Michael Medved show a caller, identifying himself as a moderately liberal high school political science teacher, stated that the conservative force he fears most in America is from the Christian conservatives who allow their theology to inform their politics.

To him, so long as your politics do not inform your theology and your theology is kept far away from your politics, you’re ok. They may agree, but only incidentally.

There’s a problem with that: humans cannot, by nature, exist in a dichotomous state.

In fact, to demand such a personal internal segregation of ones internal beliefs and external actions is to request something dangerous and displays a profound ignorance of human nature and need.

First, everyone has a theology. Commonly called our “beliefs”. It is our understanding, findings, or opinions regarding the nature (or lack thereof) of God. An athiest has a theology as surely as a Christian, they are just convinced there is not a god.

One’s beliefs regarding God informs one’s ideas on life, purpose, meaning, history, and the future. This is indisputable and is not a value judgment, merely a statement of fact.

One’s understanding of life, it’s purposes and meanings, history and the future, definitely informs one’s political persuasions. I vote with a goal and purpose. I don’t roll dice (often) and I don’t sell my vote. Though both those actions would allow us to infer your understanding of life and likely, your theology.

I am a whole human, with will and purpose. I try not to say one thing and act another. Yet even should I engage in such hypocrisy, accidentally or purposefully, there is a consistancy to the failure. My hypocritical life would have a goal and purpose: likely a hope for self-aggrandizement or gain for some deeply and closely held belief.

Watching Chariots of Fire last night with my wife, we came upon the scene where Eric Liddell has found out the heats for his race is on Sunday and is now meeting with the crown prince and the Olympic committee. Young Lord Lindsey has offered his own, longer, race to Eric as a solution and as the meeting is dispersing the Duke of Sutherland and Lord Birkenhead discuss what has just occurred:

Duke of Sutherland: A sticky moment, George.
Lord Birkenhead: Thank God for Lindsay. I thought the lad had us beaten.
Duke of Sutherland: He did have us beaten, and thank God he did.
Lord Birkenhead: I don’t quite follow you.
Duke of Sutherland: The “lad”, as you call him, is a true man of principles and a true athlete. His speed is a mere extension of his life, its force. We sought to sever his running from himself.
Lord Birkenhead: For his country’s sake, yes.
Duke of Sutherland: No sake is worth that, least of all a guilty national pride.

The Duke of Sutherland has the correct diagnosis of the issue: we can no more separate one part of a man’s soul from his other parts than we can parts of his body and expect them both to continue living.

I am a Christian. I am convinced of God’s existence and His divine will. I try to live my life in the salvation offered by the death of Jesus, God’s only begotten son and according to His laws.

I hold these beliefs in faith, not a hope in wishful thinking. Faith is not a firmly held belief in unprovable or illogical ideas, it is the belief in things proven and yet unseen.

My faith informs my life. I try to live my life according to the law of God. And not just those parts lived in private. I fail miserably more often than I succeed, but what is life without a contest, without a goal?

If I were to deny the influence of my theology on any part of my life, I would be trying to live as though I were two seperate people within the same physical body: It just doesn’t work.

And so, to you political science teacher, I hope that you will always live your entire life according to the dictates of your conscience and that your theology informs your choices. I pray that your theology will grow and you will find and find faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and countless millions since them. And yet, even if you do not, I still pray that you will be a complete person with one goal and purpose.

So . . . I spent some time browsing and have some news to share.

Iran is working on nuclear capabilities and has the neccessary nuclear material.Should we be worried? I honestly do not think we need to be worried about our own safety, but world politics could change. After all, India will be the first target.

We all knew this was comming, but Proposition 8 in California, the ammendment defining marriage as a man and a woman (not directly banning homosexual marriage) is being challenged in courts.Now let me get this right. Prop 8 was a Constitution amendment that passed . . . So, why are courts considering these cases? After all, Prop 8 is now basically the law of the land in California. The California Supreme Court may interpret the Proposition (scarry thought) but may not rule is Unconstitutional (because it is part of the Constitution). So, in light of this logic, what does the California Supreme Court think they can do?

Here is a very revealing quote from the article:

All three cases claim the measure abridges the civil rights of a vulnerable minority group. They argue that voters alone did not have the authority to enact such a significant constitutional change.

I am sorry, this just gets my blood up. If voters, the most fundamental part of our governmental system, do not have the authority to enact such legislation (more importantly, a constitutional amendment, than who does? Because, even though the legislature and courts have enacted similar legislation, they have done it outside their authority. All I can do is shake my head.

Change we can believe in has become change that always was.Obama, in a further effort to show his bipartisanship, continues to appoint Clinton and Democrat stalwarts. And the Republican party grows smaller.

Hey, there is some good news though. A disabled man in California who has filed over 400 suits against businesses for not totally complying with the American’s With Disabilities Act (not enough disable parking spaces, no hand rails . . .), has been barred from filing and more suits. The man would sue and ask the courts to fine the businesses $4,000 a day till the changes were implemented. So, your might be thinking, that is a little crooked, but he isn’t making anything off it. Well, it turns out that a lot of businesses were afraid of him and would settle out of court, earning him hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

We all like being generous, right?Well turns out that the people that have managed our money for years . . . and years, are asking for us to be generous again . . . to the tune of $1 Trillion. Yep, we gave them our earning and investments, they screwed us over, and now they want more of our money so that they can somehow “get back” what we initially invested in them. On a side note, there is only $350 Billion left from the $700 Million bail out package. It is good that the money has gone to help . . .  to help . . . to help . . . hmm . . . that is funny, I don’t know what the $350 Billion dollars helped. Probably created another bureaucracy somewhere and is helping pay for salaries. Hey it could be anything seeing as there is no oversight board.

And lastly, Obama is already voting “Present” in high profile public policy.It seems that Obama does not mind changing our anti terror policy by releasing inmates from Guantanamo, but is wary of change when it comes to taking a stand on bailouts for under producing, over paid auto companies. Maybe if they made a better product their revenue might be better. Just a thought.

Michael Medved opened my eyes.

On his radio show he was trying to explain on “Disagreement Day” to disheartened conservatives that trying to “purify” the Republican is not the correct course of action. The root of his argument:

You win by making your group bigger, not smaller.

First: you should not win by selling out. A win bought at so dear a price may not be worthwhile.

Second: you should not compromise your deepest principles either.

But, in my stands and beliefs there is a hierarchy: Abortion is one of my strongest concerns, to not value life is to not value life, there is no grey area. The issue of homosexual privilege is strong, though not as strong as abortion. Abortion is more external and more obviously a violation of laws and human rights and can be dealt with more legislatively than homosexual privilege.

The economy is a matter of principle: free market economics benefit the most people in a way most conducive to supporting Free Will as divised by God. But we can witness to people regardless of thier economic station and a faulty economy is less of a harm to people’s souls than abortion or homosexuality.

By balancing the hierarchy of beliefs and convictions and principles I can find ways to include people who I may have less in common with in reaching my goals.

I have no qualms working with members of the Mormon church to work for significant reinforcement of traditional marriage and the preventing of special privilege for homosexuals beyond the privilege accorded to heterosexuals, despite my serious disagreements with their beliefs.

I have no qualms working with Catholics to further the protection of the innocent unborn despite my belief that most Catholics are decieved and not Christians.

I have no problem working with athiests in pursuit of a libertarian economic policy despite serious disagreements on probably every other issue due to our differences in root beliefs.

The point is: Being wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove, I will work with any I can to achieve the ends which follow my convictions. I will be accepting and friendly to all as people so that none will have reason to say that I’m not for them as they could be for me.

With the devious I will be devious, with the narrow I will be narrow. The goal being that by any and all means, except those which violate my conscience and God’s law, we can advance the cause of physical and economic freedom here on earth for as many as possible, and hope and eternal freedom in the life hereafter for as many as will believe.

Refining this ideal is the fact that people follow a leader with a vision. It does not have to be a clearly defined vision so much as a stirring vision (or at least one spoken of stirringly, see Barack Obama). Reagan was the “Great Communicator” and people followed his visions. Barack Obama has a way with words, a visible empathy that stirs people to want to believe what he says.

Individually, we need to be ready and willing and able to act in concert with all kinds of people, making the “big tent” an actual Big Tent. Seek common ground more than ideological purity within the bounds of our own individual abilities to accept differences. Instead of finding people most like us, find people most able to bring most of us along with them in a path headed towards truth.

As a group we need to find those people who have strong and principled stands we can agree with mostly who are also strong communicators and vibrant individuals. Vision and passion have few foes who can stand against them working together.

That is my plan for real change.

In honor of today, and people’s thoughts, I am staring a running blog for the next couple days that will highlight people’s election oriented Facebook and Myspace statuses. All the other authors are invited to contribute to this blog.

Emily E. – is thank God it’s the last day.

Andrew B. – let the entertainment begin. I won’t look at the news till tomorrow.

Teresa P. – is proud to be an AMERICAN!!!

Tim S. – says “Go mccain”!

Sonja L. – is torn between candidates…. I lilke both in different ways.

Angela G. – is working at the polls all day tomorrow. Please go vote!

Marie H. – is not looking forward to standing in line for hours to vote tomorrow!

Maggie B. – is praying that God’s will be done tomorrow, whatever that may be.

Hillary B. – is really ready for this election to be over.

Courtney W. – is the 1st person to donate her status to not caring about getting out the vote on whichever candidate. Just vote for who you want, and pray. God knows best.

Chad P. – voted McCain/Palin. You can too! .

Melissa D. – is turning off the stinkin’ tv! If I see ONE MORE political ad, I may scream……

Chris O. – “This is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause.”

Lauren P. – is giving everything to God! .

Hayley B. – is “going to love socialized america” not.

Joseph B. – is gonna treat the election the same way David treated King Saul. With respect and honour, and the knowledge that God works all things out for good.

Bernice A. -  praying for this nation and will hold steadfast to God’s word.

Audrey S. – is hoping that Obama fulfills his promises since he’s now our president. (Lets hope this doesn’t happen!)

Justin W. – is my president is black, my lambo’s blue, and i’ll be danged if i ain’t too.

Christina H. – doesn’t know what to think….

Bryson H. – is consoled in the fact osama won’t be able to mess us up too badly in four years. And by then ppl l be smart enough t keep him out.

Sam H. – here’s the real story–Pelosi defeats Sheehan!

Margaret H. – ohhh boy…

Tim S. – really needs to move to a redstate.

Melissa D. – watched a movie instead of the election. Politics OVERLOAD.

Chase K. – is thouroughly disappointed in the way many “Christ followers” have behaved during this election. But feels the better candidate won tonight. Bravo Obama, Bravo. (Not sure I agree with you Chase)

Tyler R. – is putting things aside for… ever.

Reece A. – “It is the end of the world as we know it.”, Obama is going to destroy america, but he can’t take away my guns or my faith!

Steve S. – is tired… of everything, g’night.

Mark S. – 1 Samuel 12:13-15. (Good one Mark)

Heather W. – is thankful for a God who is still the same and is praying for our new president!

Matthew B. – is glad that there will be big issues and lots to do. Anyone up for a fight? You’d better be…

Sammi W. – is trusting God. He has a plan, He knows best! I think some people have forgotten…”One nation under God!”

Bethany B. – is not a happy Camper not that Obama has won…how can we be so stupid to elect someone who doesnt surpport our Soilders,and hates our Military…Dumb Ass.

Scott R. – is still in shock from the election results…I still feel that either way we, the people, lost. But the reality is still evading me.

Jessica P. – is not gonna let the news of the new prez rob me of my joy in Jesus! God please havve mercy on us.

B. J. J. – Obama made history by being the 1st African-American president in the United States and I am going to get a newspaper to remember that historic day.

Emily T. – does not want people to blame her when this country goes down the drain – i did not vote for him.

Sarah H. – is very disapointed in the election results!

Grace B. – still loves America.

Amanda T. – is ?

Ryan C. – Will respect and pray for Obama as the President of the United States as all christians should.

Hayley B. – is “going to love socialized america” not.

Tim V. – salutes his president, MR. Barack Obama.

The NYTimes goes through the numbers and estimates and says that Obama’s health plans will cause the cost of hiring people to go up for businesses, and this will cause businesses to decide not to hire people.

thatmarkguy says the NAA(L)CP is really involved in this election. More so than the last one. Much more so.

Compare the homepages then and now. There is one link to an article lower on the homepage regarding voter supression back in 2004, when two old white men were once again battling for head honcho.

Now the website looks like an election campaign, complete with the large black bus with the slogan “Vote Hard”. Conspicuously absent is the direct object. I suppose they expect the reader to add their own as applicable: “Left” being their preference.

Election 2008:

Election 2004:

It’s almost like it’s the leftists who want it to be about race while screaming interminably about how racist the right is…

Whodathunkit?!?

Is it just me, or are people really not listening to our political candidates. I can understand people not listening to John McCain. He has nothing to say and has been using the same lame attacks for about three weeks now. However, why aren’t people listening to Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden. They have a ton to say. In fact, the more they talk, the more they reveal themselves. Here is one example and here is another example.

Some general talking points from these audio clips include:

• The Constitution doesn’t say what the federal government must do on my behalf. (Actually it does. It says that the federal government is to protect me and create an environment for me to prosper in. However, it condones little else.)
• The Supreme Court is wrong for not addressing the redistribution of wealth or the economic injustice in this society (My goodness, keep the courts out of this. If they courts [especially the Supreme Court] are supposed to interpret the Constitution, why would they even touch this issue seeing as it is not addressed in the Constitution.)
• Civil Rights movements didn’t break free from the constraints of the Constitution. (No, it redefined the Constitution to protect all citizens of the United States. It was not supposed to give give people the liberty to steal the money of hard working Americans.)
• The Constitution is actually a list of negative liberties. (Darn right it is. The Constitution was supposed to be a restraint on Government and all its dealings, not on the citizens. Remember where the founding fathers came from? Yah, they didn’t want an oppressive government.)
• The civil Rights movement didn’t do enough to bring about a “redistribution of uh, um, uh change” (you wanted to say wealth, right?)
• Redistribution of wealth is an administrative responsibility. ( Keep your butter finger government hands out of my pocket. You are supposed to do a good enough job for us to want to give you money, or at least not mind paying our taxes. That is the administrative role. Do a good job, earn our respect. Earn our dollar. Then manage the money to OUR advantage. But, since you can’t properly manage the redistribute halfway legitimate taxes [anyone remember Social Security], why would I want to trust you with the stealing and redistribution of my money.)
• The Constitution reflects “The” fundamental flaw that continues to this day. (What, the lack of a redistribution of wealth to the lazy or the down right racism that is rampant in all parts of the United States? Guess what, I have news for you, the majority of the U. S. is color blind now. Take a trip to California. It is hard to find racism there, unless it is directed at Mexican-Americans [and the African-Americans are the primary proponents of that racism]. However, Mr. Obama, you will find racism if you look for it. I mean, just look at the fact that estimates say that 95% of African-Americans will be voting for you.)

And here are a couple gems from this article.

People had a way of hearing what they wanted in Mr. Obama’s words. Earlier, after a long, tortured discussion about whether it was better to be called “black” or “African-American,” . . . According to Mr. Ogletree, students on each side of the debate thought he was endorsing their side. “Everyone was nodding, Oh, he agrees with me,” he said.

[In a Robotic Tone] Yes Master . . . Lead on oh Great One . . . The world will bow before your superior rhetoric . . .

But mainly, Mr. Obama stayed away from the extremes of campus debate, often choosing safe topics for his speeches. At the black law students’ annual conference, he exhorted students to remember the obligations that came with their privileged education. His speeches, delivered in the oratorical manner of a Baptist minister, were more memorable for style than substance, Mr. Mack said. “It’s the inspiration of the speech rather than the specific content,” he said.

Yes Great One . . . another great showing . . . your superior speaking ability sent shivers down my spine . . .

a mouse infestation at the review office provoked a long exchange about rodent rights — as well as some uncertainty about what Mr. Obama himself thought about the issue at hand.

In dozens of interviews, his friends said they could not remember his specific views from that era, beyond a general emphasis on diversity and social and economic justice.

Yes master . . . you listen to my needs . . . you know who I am and what I want . . . you will give me my deepest desire . . . All will see you as our Savior from . . . um, uh, um  . . . What can you save us from, I didn’t hear that part?

In interviews, Mr. Obama was modest and careful. (In a rare slip, he told The Associated Press: “I’m not interested in the suburbs. The suburbs bore me.”)