Merry Christmas to you and yours,
and may true joy fill the hours...
And when the season 'tis full past,
and all the eggnog is gone at last,
and sugary sweet, cookies, cakes,
have gone and all their vengeance take,
may your New Year's Resolutions hold,
and make of resolutions truth you told.
Merry Christmas to you and yours,
and may true joy fill the hours...
Of family time and memories
to be recalled, and "jollily"
renew your laughter and lend a smile,
tying hearts together all the while,
as time flies by and leaves a sigh,
of contented thoughts of times gone by.
Merry Christmas to you and yours,
and may true joy fill the hours.
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Monday, December 6, 2010
E Pluribus Unum
"E Pluribus Unum"
And so on they say,
"Out of many, one"
And believe what you may
It won’t be one from many,
It’s not built that way
Its shape changed years ago
When power corrupted, blinded, swayed.
"E Pluribus Unum"
The intent of the Fathers
No longer a factor,
Considered but not obeyed.
Discarded by those who wished,
Planned to take what they may.
And "Unum" no longer existed:
Dreams from the Fathers dismayed.
"E Pluribus" turned away
From what the Founders did say.
"Unum" lost, pulled apart, torn,
Ripped from the future as well as the past,
"Unum" trampled upon by those
Who rewrite history,
Destroy the future for their want:
Power is their drug.
And addiction rules those who have it too long;
Gathering possessions, influence,
In hope to belong,
They betray grandchildren’s hopes, rights --
Prosperity stumbles -- and grandma was in power.
"E Pluribus" and "Unum" no longer talk.
Freedom for "Pluribus" just a word,
"Unum" took it all away,
Ground it into dust, soft, silky powder,
Light, floating, blowing:
Disappeared in the wind of "Unum’s" rule.
"E Pluribus Unum" escapes the lips of rulers
(As they laugh behind their eyes) and speak
Of what they will do to help all,
Favoring only their voters, helpers,
Friends, supporters, and lie to "Pluribus" again.
"E Pluribus Unum" had its blood spilled
Long ago, slow trickle at first, then
Over the wooden benches of the House
And Senate, pumped steadily onto the sidewalk,
Down the pavement, Congress’s twinkling eyes,
Laughing, as they wrote more laws,
Favored more their own,
Making "Unum" of themselves;
The rest to be the servants of the one.
Fiefdom, serfdom, servitude:
Citizens shall obey.
Or face the wrath
Of government’s path
And of "E Pluribus Unum"
Our lives shall go the same way.
"Ashes to ashes, dust to dust"
"E Pluribus Unum" has gone that way.
Forever our future determined by "Unum" --
Until, sackcloth wrapped, "E Pluribus" discovers
Its voice again and stands against "Unum’s" full sway.
Consider the future and look to the past
For all things depend upon this:
Independence was won, not just with muskets --
‘Twas words first shot that fired --
When – if ever – our story shall change
And "E Pluribus Unum" takes long lost breath,
No blood need be let,
Nor bodies to bury,
But "wounds" shall be plenty;
And words start the story
Of "E Pluribus Unum’s" return!
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
And so on they say,
"Out of many, one"
And believe what you may
It won’t be one from many,
It’s not built that way
Its shape changed years ago
When power corrupted, blinded, swayed.
"E Pluribus Unum"
The intent of the Fathers
No longer a factor,
Considered but not obeyed.
Discarded by those who wished,
Planned to take what they may.
And "Unum" no longer existed:
Dreams from the Fathers dismayed.
"E Pluribus" turned away
From what the Founders did say.
"Unum" lost, pulled apart, torn,
Ripped from the future as well as the past,
"Unum" trampled upon by those
Who rewrite history,
Destroy the future for their want:
Power is their drug.
And addiction rules those who have it too long;
Gathering possessions, influence,
In hope to belong,
They betray grandchildren’s hopes, rights --
Prosperity stumbles -- and grandma was in power.
"E Pluribus" and "Unum" no longer talk.
Freedom for "Pluribus" just a word,
"Unum" took it all away,
Ground it into dust, soft, silky powder,
Light, floating, blowing:
Disappeared in the wind of "Unum’s" rule.
"E Pluribus Unum" escapes the lips of rulers
(As they laugh behind their eyes) and speak
Of what they will do to help all,
Favoring only their voters, helpers,
Friends, supporters, and lie to "Pluribus" again.
"E Pluribus Unum" had its blood spilled
Long ago, slow trickle at first, then
Over the wooden benches of the House
And Senate, pumped steadily onto the sidewalk,
Down the pavement, Congress’s twinkling eyes,
Laughing, as they wrote more laws,
Favored more their own,
Making "Unum" of themselves;
The rest to be the servants of the one.
Fiefdom, serfdom, servitude:
Citizens shall obey.
Or face the wrath
Of government’s path
And of "E Pluribus Unum"
Our lives shall go the same way.
"Ashes to ashes, dust to dust"
"E Pluribus Unum" has gone that way.
Forever our future determined by "Unum" --
Until, sackcloth wrapped, "E Pluribus" discovers
Its voice again and stands against "Unum’s" full sway.
Consider the future and look to the past
For all things depend upon this:
Independence was won, not just with muskets --
‘Twas words first shot that fired --
When – if ever – our story shall change
And "E Pluribus Unum" takes long lost breath,
No blood need be let,
Nor bodies to bury,
But "wounds" shall be plenty;
And words start the story
Of "E Pluribus Unum’s" return!
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
Saturday, November 27, 2010
My Theory: All “Atheists” Believe in God
Could all “atheists” actually believe in God? Could it be that all their posturing, lawsuits, speeches, science, press releases and Madalyn Murray O’Hairs really belie their true beliefs? Startling to think that this could be true, but consider the evidence.
First: their chosen designation: “atheist”. The term atheism originated from the Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god". The “a” from the Greek meaning "without" or "not", and “theos” from God. So, an “a-theist” would be someone who is “not” God or “without” God (that “not” part is a given). If there is no God, then why include the idea of him in their name? Why not just say “pagan” (heathen: a person who does not acknowledge your god), why include the idea of a god within the label of someone who does not believe in nor accept gods? That’s like saying “I am anti-baseball, but my name is Baseball.”
Second: If they don’t believe in God, why do they spend so much effort, time, money and breath denying His existence? After all, you don’t see them fighting the idea of the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, or the existence of leprechauns, do you? They don’t believe in those entities so they don’t fight the idea of their existence. However, with God, they spend millions of dollars on lawsuits, thousands of man hours, print reams of paper in books and pamphlets, post hundreds of thousands of atheism pages on the internet, and put in appearances on television and radio shows in order to deny the existence of someone they don’t believe in. If they don’t believe in Him, why the effort? Why spend so much money on Him? The more they protest the more they show how much they are worried about Him and the more they prove their belief. Why not ignore the issue as they do with the existence of Sasquatch or Tinkerbell if they do not believe?
Third: If atheists believe in medicine and science (and only medicine and science) why do they not consider that belief in God? After all, they prove His existence, do they not? Consider that medical science is always making discoveries on how things work with our bodies, and how miraculous they really are, and that is a sign of God. Evolution goes simplest to most complex, and tries not to get complex. With our bodies, we can see evidence of God in how they work, what makes them tick and in the ways that – miraculously – we are healed. Medicine cannot account for the kinds of miracles seen in the human body’s recovery, spontaneous remission of diseases, or in other things that human bodies do. They can neither explain them, nor deny them. God in action in the atheist’s belief in medicine.
Fourth: Science – besides medical science -- is constantly making new discoveries, finding the answers to new questions. Quantum physics (as did other fields of study) led to new laws that science’s observation, testing and deducing proved to be there. Did their discovery make those rules’ existence come about? No. Their discovery – their finding – simply proved that they already existed. Somehow, those rules of quantum physics, chaos theory, and fluid dynamics already existed before they were found by scientists. Those rules didn’t just pop into existence out of nothing. Did they “evolve” or were they pre-programmed by an intelligent designer who knew how things work?
Atheists believe that science will disprove God and they believe in science, yet all of science’s work (whether they admit it or not) proves the existence of God. To wit: If the universe, solar system, life, "evolved", then what happened to make it "evolve"? Wouldn’t there be some sort of need for evolution, according to the atheistic ideal of Darwin’s theory of evolution? Survival of the fittest would not suffice in an universe of nothingness, void and without form. What would be the catalyst for evolution? If the universe developed purely out of randomness and these rules were not in play before the process started, then what put the rules into place? Was it the randomness that suddenly found order and the rules followed out of already existing order from randomness? Can that happen that without the rules in place the rules develop themselves? Fact is that chaos (randomness) can develop into some semblance of order, but the rules were there first to make it so, just as scientists finding those rules made the rules already there, and not the discovery of those rules birth the rules’ existence. Therefore, science has proven the rules – rules that make scientific and mathematical sense – were in existence prior to the formation of the universe. Therefore, intelligent design (it must be intelligent design for the rules to make sense) is responsible for the rules and thus, God existed prior to the universe’s existence.
Some of you would argue that last sentence, I know. But watch the videos here and and continued here and tell me that the rules were not there prior to scientific discovery. Science didn’t write the rules. Man didn’t come up with them and enforce them. If they weren’t done by man they had to have been done by God.
"But, wait!" some cry. "Nature could have done it itself!" The belief that there is no God demands the belief that nature had to have made all of the rules itself, but how did that come about? How did nature’s pre-universe (as we know it), pre-earth (as historically represented via Pangaea, etc.) pre-evolution (into humans) decide to write its own rules? Random atoms floating somewhere in darkness and tumult, banging into each other, floating without rules and without purpose, evolved order without outside interference? Random atoms chose of their own free will to cooperate, to lump together, to go in a certain direction at the same time, to change their physical and chemical characteristics and become something that – by chance and by random association – would become a universe, solar system, planet that would not only develop all of this out of nothingness, but also be capable of sustaining life as we know it? It not only sustains life, but it creates life out of non-life: a breathless (in any way, shape or form), non-eating, form without a heartbeat of any sort, without any sign of life whatsoever was created by this randomness and became suddenly alive. Alive in the sense of the scientific sense of the word: Life: (noun) "the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally." In the atheists’ world, randomness evolved into life, without interference of an intelligent being.
Fifth: Not only that, but all this randomness evolved into homo sapiens, humans as we know them. Just as Darwin described, atheists believe it to have been. Darwinism defies belief in God because we were not created, we evolved. Apes and protozoa and all of that; we came from nothing and to nothing we return. That’s all there is to it. Therefore there can be no God because there is no creation. That sort of thinking proves nothing. Saying that the existence of “X” always disproves the existence of “Y” is erroneous: they could co-exist, could they not? I do not believe in evolution as Darwin set it forth and others expounded upon. There are way too many problems with it and there is within the scientific community still disagreement on it. (Read more on that at Evolution Guy.) That being said, if any sort of evolution did occur, who is to say that God did not make that happen as well? The atheist’s insistence that God is not real because Darwin is, may just as well prove that God exists because things are happening in an orderly, intelligently designed fashion. Therefore, Darwin’s Theory – or a modified version thereof – may very well be a confirmation of God’s design and of His creative hand in the “evolution” of man. Atheists believe in God in that way, too.
Considering all of this, no matter which way you slice it, it seems to me that atheists are not atheists, but theists in disguise. They may profess that they do not believe in the God of the Bible, or the God of Islam, or in any particular god, but everything they profess faith in either proves the God of the Bible or at the very least does not disprove Him. Their own actions – which speak louder than their words – prove they are afraid of and don’t want God to exist. If I am correct and there is a God that we must answer to, then atheists have a lot to answer for as do Christians. The question is: Theists all, or just afraid of God?
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
First: their chosen designation: “atheist”. The term atheism originated from the Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god". The “a” from the Greek meaning "without" or "not", and “theos” from God. So, an “a-theist” would be someone who is “not” God or “without” God (that “not” part is a given). If there is no God, then why include the idea of him in their name? Why not just say “pagan” (heathen: a person who does not acknowledge your god), why include the idea of a god within the label of someone who does not believe in nor accept gods? That’s like saying “I am anti-baseball, but my name is Baseball.”
Second: If they don’t believe in God, why do they spend so much effort, time, money and breath denying His existence? After all, you don’t see them fighting the idea of the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, or the existence of leprechauns, do you? They don’t believe in those entities so they don’t fight the idea of their existence. However, with God, they spend millions of dollars on lawsuits, thousands of man hours, print reams of paper in books and pamphlets, post hundreds of thousands of atheism pages on the internet, and put in appearances on television and radio shows in order to deny the existence of someone they don’t believe in. If they don’t believe in Him, why the effort? Why spend so much money on Him? The more they protest the more they show how much they are worried about Him and the more they prove their belief. Why not ignore the issue as they do with the existence of Sasquatch or Tinkerbell if they do not believe?
Third: If atheists believe in medicine and science (and only medicine and science) why do they not consider that belief in God? After all, they prove His existence, do they not? Consider that medical science is always making discoveries on how things work with our bodies, and how miraculous they really are, and that is a sign of God. Evolution goes simplest to most complex, and tries not to get complex. With our bodies, we can see evidence of God in how they work, what makes them tick and in the ways that – miraculously – we are healed. Medicine cannot account for the kinds of miracles seen in the human body’s recovery, spontaneous remission of diseases, or in other things that human bodies do. They can neither explain them, nor deny them. God in action in the atheist’s belief in medicine.
Fourth: Science – besides medical science -- is constantly making new discoveries, finding the answers to new questions. Quantum physics (as did other fields of study) led to new laws that science’s observation, testing and deducing proved to be there. Did their discovery make those rules’ existence come about? No. Their discovery – their finding – simply proved that they already existed. Somehow, those rules of quantum physics, chaos theory, and fluid dynamics already existed before they were found by scientists. Those rules didn’t just pop into existence out of nothing. Did they “evolve” or were they pre-programmed by an intelligent designer who knew how things work?
Atheists believe that science will disprove God and they believe in science, yet all of science’s work (whether they admit it or not) proves the existence of God. To wit: If the universe, solar system, life, "evolved", then what happened to make it "evolve"? Wouldn’t there be some sort of need for evolution, according to the atheistic ideal of Darwin’s theory of evolution? Survival of the fittest would not suffice in an universe of nothingness, void and without form. What would be the catalyst for evolution? If the universe developed purely out of randomness and these rules were not in play before the process started, then what put the rules into place? Was it the randomness that suddenly found order and the rules followed out of already existing order from randomness? Can that happen that without the rules in place the rules develop themselves? Fact is that chaos (randomness) can develop into some semblance of order, but the rules were there first to make it so, just as scientists finding those rules made the rules already there, and not the discovery of those rules birth the rules’ existence. Therefore, science has proven the rules – rules that make scientific and mathematical sense – were in existence prior to the formation of the universe. Therefore, intelligent design (it must be intelligent design for the rules to make sense) is responsible for the rules and thus, God existed prior to the universe’s existence.
Some of you would argue that last sentence, I know. But watch the videos here and and continued here and tell me that the rules were not there prior to scientific discovery. Science didn’t write the rules. Man didn’t come up with them and enforce them. If they weren’t done by man they had to have been done by God.
"But, wait!" some cry. "Nature could have done it itself!" The belief that there is no God demands the belief that nature had to have made all of the rules itself, but how did that come about? How did nature’s pre-universe (as we know it), pre-earth (as historically represented via Pangaea, etc.) pre-evolution (into humans) decide to write its own rules? Random atoms floating somewhere in darkness and tumult, banging into each other, floating without rules and without purpose, evolved order without outside interference? Random atoms chose of their own free will to cooperate, to lump together, to go in a certain direction at the same time, to change their physical and chemical characteristics and become something that – by chance and by random association – would become a universe, solar system, planet that would not only develop all of this out of nothingness, but also be capable of sustaining life as we know it? It not only sustains life, but it creates life out of non-life: a breathless (in any way, shape or form), non-eating, form without a heartbeat of any sort, without any sign of life whatsoever was created by this randomness and became suddenly alive. Alive in the sense of the scientific sense of the word: Life: (noun) "the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally." In the atheists’ world, randomness evolved into life, without interference of an intelligent being.
Fifth: Not only that, but all this randomness evolved into homo sapiens, humans as we know them. Just as Darwin described, atheists believe it to have been. Darwinism defies belief in God because we were not created, we evolved. Apes and protozoa and all of that; we came from nothing and to nothing we return. That’s all there is to it. Therefore there can be no God because there is no creation. That sort of thinking proves nothing. Saying that the existence of “X” always disproves the existence of “Y” is erroneous: they could co-exist, could they not? I do not believe in evolution as Darwin set it forth and others expounded upon. There are way too many problems with it and there is within the scientific community still disagreement on it. (Read more on that at Evolution Guy.) That being said, if any sort of evolution did occur, who is to say that God did not make that happen as well? The atheist’s insistence that God is not real because Darwin is, may just as well prove that God exists because things are happening in an orderly, intelligently designed fashion. Therefore, Darwin’s Theory – or a modified version thereof – may very well be a confirmation of God’s design and of His creative hand in the “evolution” of man. Atheists believe in God in that way, too.
Considering all of this, no matter which way you slice it, it seems to me that atheists are not atheists, but theists in disguise. They may profess that they do not believe in the God of the Bible, or the God of Islam, or in any particular god, but everything they profess faith in either proves the God of the Bible or at the very least does not disprove Him. Their own actions – which speak louder than their words – prove they are afraid of and don’t want God to exist. If I am correct and there is a God that we must answer to, then atheists have a lot to answer for as do Christians. The question is: Theists all, or just afraid of God?
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
Monday, November 22, 2010
Delta 4 Heavy
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
My husband has been in the rocket launch business for years. He has launched almost everything that goes into outer space and he's got hands-on experience as a member of the last all "Blue Suit" launch team. "Blue Suit" meaning all U.S. Air Force. He has launched Thors, Atlases, Deltas, etc., mated a few satellites into the Space Shuttle; basically, done it all. This particular rocket he was a back-up guy for Danny. A little technical problem prevented it from launching on Friday evening, but they got that straightened out.
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
For the first time, we left our backyard and went to watch the launch within six or seven miles (as the crow flies) of the actual launch pad. We were there for the first try on Friday, but to no avail. We went back on Sunday and watched as it lit up, and took a slow crawl into the sky. It went up without a hitch (as far as I know), but not quietly. The sound made some of us whoop and it just rumbled. It rumbles at our house, too, but not like this. As we watched it go up I hoped things worked properly, because I have seen enough not make it to know that it would not be a good thing if something happened.
© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved
Nothing matches the feel of watching something that big and lumbering go into the sky. It makes one proud of being American to see that thing go up, to know that we made that happen. We have the technology to do such a thing, to make the satellites that fly on these lumbering behemoths, and the ability to do what few others can. My husband is part of that team. America's in safe hands.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Environmentalism: Establishing a Hereditary Theocracy
Environmentalists worldwide believe that the earth is either “warming” or “cooling”. Depending, of course, upon to whom you are speaking, you may hear either answer. They also believe that man – specifically Americans – are having drastically deleterious effects on the earth’s environment and that we are responsible for some “really bad” stuff that’s either happened, happening, or shall definitely happen in the future. It’s all our fault, especially America’s, and the responsibility falls directly at our feet when it comes to making the earth so polluted, hurting and dangerous. It’s not the earth’s fault. It’s us. We are the demons. We are to blame.
Not only do they believe this, but they are teaching their offspring to believe the same thing as well. It’s Mommy and Daddy teaching Junior and Sally that if they do “X” that it’s bad for the planet. A deep guilt complex lays on the children’s breasts as they exhale and as they poop and pee; adding bad things to the atmosphere, the water, the earth. It’s wrong to throw things away, to drive an SUV or anything other than a little scooter car that has as much power as a roller skate. Deep sighs of regret break through as they fly over to Europe on their sixth European vacation in as many years; but it is not all guilt and regret. They shall be heading to Ethiopia after their European spa vacation to help feed the hungry, dig a new ditch for them to get dirty water to the village instead of the villagers walking six miles a day and to feel better about their travel because – after all – it is helping people. That makes it all okay.
Never mind that the children are exposed to disease, exposed to dangerous ideas that, if implemented at home, will endanger the welfare of their own children and grandchildren as well as the rest of the country. Never mind that even though they are “helping” people, there are organizations that are already there that – if given the proper support of the corrupt government the environmentalists support – would be able to solve the problems in that country with their own efforts without outside “help”. Never mind that – twenty-five years from now, the children of the environmentalists will be doing the same work, with the same groups, but with more power if we do not stand up to their parents now.
Fact of the matter is that environmentalists are building a power structure based upon their singular belief that the environment is part of their “god” and part of their god must be served, protected, obeyed and worshipped. If we do not do thus, we shall forever be screwed. The earth will fight back and we shall all perish because “we did it to ourselves.” That belief – as parents are wont to do – is passed on to their children, as is the parents’ positions in a lot of the organizations that support the environmentalists’ ideas. Junior becomes Chairman of the Board of “The Natural Conservatory Organization” after Dad has passed on. It means continuity of the pattern, continuity of the leadership ideal, continuity of the vision: Junior is more trustworthy than the VP because Junior has the same genes, was brought up with it, has it not just in his teaching, but in his blood. A birthright has been established and it shall not be denied.
I say “theocracy” because it’s a belief system that is based purely upon faith and the ideal that the environment is “god”. Faith that there is “global warming” or “global cooling”; man can have a lasting impact on the environment; that if we tried, we could equal God’s creation as to how destructive we can be, how much damage we can do to the earth (as compared to how much damage the earth can do to us), etc. Faith has it that the Exxon Valdez has so damaged the planet that it will never be the same (is that always such a bad thing?) and that if we don’t change now, we will never have the chance to make things right. Faith has it that it was our pollution that made the deserts bigger, hotter and more arid. Faith has it that man has to be responsible for every bad thing the earth has experienced since its creation. That’s true faith to think all of that. Faith takes things that one cannot see, cannot prove, cannot show physical evidence of and says it is true anyways. Such is environmentalism therefore a “theocracy” is established.
What harm can this “Hereditary Theocracy” of environmentalism do? If we do not resist environmentalism now, we can kiss our children’s futures goodbye. If we do not fight environmentalist teachings, laws (incandescent light bulbs are going away after 2011), school systems to indoctrinate our children, then we sign our own warrants.
Not only will there be more laws establishing “the environment” as the first and foremost consideration for everything, but it will also mean that we will be limited as to what types of jobs we can have, what types of appliances we can have, what building materials we can use for our personal property (homes and office buildings; sheds even), what kinds of cars we will drive, the fuel we put into them, the airplanes we can ride on and what types of fuel they can use, perhaps how often we can fly without special permission, or tracking our mileage as we use our personal vehicles and company cars. Those who are not “environmental wackos” will be made to kowtow to those who are because those who have been taught the mantra, the faith, will be those who have the power. That power will come via having more influence in D.C., having friends in the business, knowing the right folks to contact about “X”.
This will enable the noose that used to fit loosely around the necks of the American people to be slowly, steadily tightened and before they know it, Americans everywhere will be using a set number of electricity watts per day as prescribed by the federal government under the EPA, after studies done by the environmental group, “Citizens United for Environmental Freedom” (or some such nonsense) find that “it’s the only sustainable way.”
Junior’s legacy will be a single child’s adoption from a foreign country with too many live births per capita (deemed unsustainable via the U.N.) and that child’s parents were lucky to get rid of the child prior to their being punished severely with food rations cut in half because they had a pregnancy that was not approved beforehand. Junior’s single child will have the inherited position within the environmental groups that his adoptive daddy has prepared him to inherit. All those policies Junior discussed implementing, the child – heir – will now put into effect because it will honor his adoptive father. It’s like Obama trying to make sure his daddy’s hatred of America and England, those dreams of destruction, come true; with Junior’s child trying to please daddy just as Obama is trying. This shall be seen in the environmental circles as a laudable thing; while to the nonbelievers, it shall just be more pain, less freedom and fewer constitutional rights for us and our progeny.
As the environmentalists get more power, as their heirs get more power, we lose more of our freedoms, more of our choices, more of our futures and of our children’s futures. Yet, that is what the environmentalists wish: power at all costs, even freedom’s. Your future, your beliefs matter not, nor does your desire to “live long and prosper” in America. If you do that, you may drop a piece of paper down a drainage pipe and that piece of paper is going to end us all. Freedom’s loss will be the environmentalist’s gain; as seen with legislated washing machines, toilets, light bulbs and gas millage.
If environmentalists are not stopped here and now, and our freedom restored, then when and where will they be? What will it take to make sure that your children or grandchildren have as much freedom as you and I? Or will it happen that they go all the way and our children’s children shall be paying the price for our desire to ignore it, to get along, to not make waves? If so, what shall their futures look like besides so very limited?
Environmentalism screams that we are the cause of all bad things. Environmentalism has faith that we are harming the earth with our deeds. Theocratic beliefs or not, environmentalists have no right – constitutional or otherwise – to impose upon the rest of us their beliefs. Legislating environmentalism is just as wrong as legislating that the Baptist Church become the “official religion” of America. Yet, with environmentalism, because there is no god specified (although everyone knows what is being worshipped), it is hunky-dory with those who would scream bloody murder otherwise. As long as it’s not the God of the Christian Bible, than any other god is okay; environmental earth worship included. Without due diligence on our part, their children will have power to place limits over our children and thereby doom our children to be less than what they could be, to do less than what they could have done, to be less of who they could have been. Environmentalism needs to be stopped now, sanity and common sense smacked into the people who have been brainwashed into it, and a return to the Founding Father’s principles of freedom restored. Otherwise, the hereditary theocracy will rule and our children’s children are doomed.
Not only do they believe this, but they are teaching their offspring to believe the same thing as well. It’s Mommy and Daddy teaching Junior and Sally that if they do “X” that it’s bad for the planet. A deep guilt complex lays on the children’s breasts as they exhale and as they poop and pee; adding bad things to the atmosphere, the water, the earth. It’s wrong to throw things away, to drive an SUV or anything other than a little scooter car that has as much power as a roller skate. Deep sighs of regret break through as they fly over to Europe on their sixth European vacation in as many years; but it is not all guilt and regret. They shall be heading to Ethiopia after their European spa vacation to help feed the hungry, dig a new ditch for them to get dirty water to the village instead of the villagers walking six miles a day and to feel better about their travel because – after all – it is helping people. That makes it all okay.
Never mind that the children are exposed to disease, exposed to dangerous ideas that, if implemented at home, will endanger the welfare of their own children and grandchildren as well as the rest of the country. Never mind that even though they are “helping” people, there are organizations that are already there that – if given the proper support of the corrupt government the environmentalists support – would be able to solve the problems in that country with their own efforts without outside “help”. Never mind that – twenty-five years from now, the children of the environmentalists will be doing the same work, with the same groups, but with more power if we do not stand up to their parents now.
Fact of the matter is that environmentalists are building a power structure based upon their singular belief that the environment is part of their “god” and part of their god must be served, protected, obeyed and worshipped. If we do not do thus, we shall forever be screwed. The earth will fight back and we shall all perish because “we did it to ourselves.” That belief – as parents are wont to do – is passed on to their children, as is the parents’ positions in a lot of the organizations that support the environmentalists’ ideas. Junior becomes Chairman of the Board of “The Natural Conservatory Organization” after Dad has passed on. It means continuity of the pattern, continuity of the leadership ideal, continuity of the vision: Junior is more trustworthy than the VP because Junior has the same genes, was brought up with it, has it not just in his teaching, but in his blood. A birthright has been established and it shall not be denied.
I say “theocracy” because it’s a belief system that is based purely upon faith and the ideal that the environment is “god”. Faith that there is “global warming” or “global cooling”; man can have a lasting impact on the environment; that if we tried, we could equal God’s creation as to how destructive we can be, how much damage we can do to the earth (as compared to how much damage the earth can do to us), etc. Faith has it that the Exxon Valdez has so damaged the planet that it will never be the same (is that always such a bad thing?) and that if we don’t change now, we will never have the chance to make things right. Faith has it that it was our pollution that made the deserts bigger, hotter and more arid. Faith has it that man has to be responsible for every bad thing the earth has experienced since its creation. That’s true faith to think all of that. Faith takes things that one cannot see, cannot prove, cannot show physical evidence of and says it is true anyways. Such is environmentalism therefore a “theocracy” is established.
What harm can this “Hereditary Theocracy” of environmentalism do? If we do not resist environmentalism now, we can kiss our children’s futures goodbye. If we do not fight environmentalist teachings, laws (incandescent light bulbs are going away after 2011), school systems to indoctrinate our children, then we sign our own warrants.
Not only will there be more laws establishing “the environment” as the first and foremost consideration for everything, but it will also mean that we will be limited as to what types of jobs we can have, what types of appliances we can have, what building materials we can use for our personal property (homes and office buildings; sheds even), what kinds of cars we will drive, the fuel we put into them, the airplanes we can ride on and what types of fuel they can use, perhaps how often we can fly without special permission, or tracking our mileage as we use our personal vehicles and company cars. Those who are not “environmental wackos” will be made to kowtow to those who are because those who have been taught the mantra, the faith, will be those who have the power. That power will come via having more influence in D.C., having friends in the business, knowing the right folks to contact about “X”.
This will enable the noose that used to fit loosely around the necks of the American people to be slowly, steadily tightened and before they know it, Americans everywhere will be using a set number of electricity watts per day as prescribed by the federal government under the EPA, after studies done by the environmental group, “Citizens United for Environmental Freedom” (or some such nonsense) find that “it’s the only sustainable way.”
Junior’s legacy will be a single child’s adoption from a foreign country with too many live births per capita (deemed unsustainable via the U.N.) and that child’s parents were lucky to get rid of the child prior to their being punished severely with food rations cut in half because they had a pregnancy that was not approved beforehand. Junior’s single child will have the inherited position within the environmental groups that his adoptive daddy has prepared him to inherit. All those policies Junior discussed implementing, the child – heir – will now put into effect because it will honor his adoptive father. It’s like Obama trying to make sure his daddy’s hatred of America and England, those dreams of destruction, come true; with Junior’s child trying to please daddy just as Obama is trying. This shall be seen in the environmental circles as a laudable thing; while to the nonbelievers, it shall just be more pain, less freedom and fewer constitutional rights for us and our progeny.
As the environmentalists get more power, as their heirs get more power, we lose more of our freedoms, more of our choices, more of our futures and of our children’s futures. Yet, that is what the environmentalists wish: power at all costs, even freedom’s. Your future, your beliefs matter not, nor does your desire to “live long and prosper” in America. If you do that, you may drop a piece of paper down a drainage pipe and that piece of paper is going to end us all. Freedom’s loss will be the environmentalist’s gain; as seen with legislated washing machines, toilets, light bulbs and gas millage.
If environmentalists are not stopped here and now, and our freedom restored, then when and where will they be? What will it take to make sure that your children or grandchildren have as much freedom as you and I? Or will it happen that they go all the way and our children’s children shall be paying the price for our desire to ignore it, to get along, to not make waves? If so, what shall their futures look like besides so very limited?
Environmentalism screams that we are the cause of all bad things. Environmentalism has faith that we are harming the earth with our deeds. Theocratic beliefs or not, environmentalists have no right – constitutional or otherwise – to impose upon the rest of us their beliefs. Legislating environmentalism is just as wrong as legislating that the Baptist Church become the “official religion” of America. Yet, with environmentalism, because there is no god specified (although everyone knows what is being worshipped), it is hunky-dory with those who would scream bloody murder otherwise. As long as it’s not the God of the Christian Bible, than any other god is okay; environmental earth worship included. Without due diligence on our part, their children will have power to place limits over our children and thereby doom our children to be less than what they could be, to do less than what they could have done, to be less of who they could have been. Environmentalism needs to be stopped now, sanity and common sense smacked into the people who have been brainwashed into it, and a return to the Founding Father’s principles of freedom restored. Otherwise, the hereditary theocracy will rule and our children’s children are doomed.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
An Open Letter to Elected Conservatives
If Conservatives win the House and Senate this November 2nd – especially if they have a veto-proof majority – I have a list of things you need to do in order to be deemed to be worthy of the office. Others may or may not agree with my list, but these are the things I think you should make a priority in order to make your election – our hope and trust in you -- worthwhile.
1) De-fund every position that was created by the health care reform bill and revoke it immediately. This will ensure that the taxpayers’ money is not spent on administration of the bill that should have never passed because the vast majority of us did not want it anyways. Progressives love to talk about the “democracy” (i.e., majority rule) that they think is the law of the land, but when it comes to governing against the majority of the people with health care reform, they didn’t listen to the majority of the people. Remove the funding for every position created in this bill: every secretary, administrator, every computer person, every janitor.
2) De-fund every czar position that Obama has created. No more money should be given to people who have unconstitutional powers to create rules and regulations over us that we – without constitutional authority – have to obey. No internet czar, no food czar, no health care czar should receive a dime of taxpayer dollars after you are sworn in.
3) De-fund every bailout scheme. Any time the taxpayers of America are saddled with another bailout scheme – caulking windows to banks and car manufacturers – the taxpayer has no say in it and they are strapped with the debt that comes from it. Just stop that nonsense now. De-fund every scheme that the taxpayers are being made to pay. No more government involvement in business bailouts!
4) Do serious and complete investigations of the voter fraud that has happened during these 2010 elections as well as the 2008 elections – including this administration’s (and Eric Holder’s) decisions regarding the New Black Panther Party and their voter intimidation. Investigate every incident in Texas, Florida, Arizona, everywhere and anywhere in America there was voter fraud reported and make sure that there is someone held accountable. The American people no longer want their votes to be stolen from them, defrauded from them, their voices to be negated and silenced because – according to our Founding Fathers and the U.S. Constitution – we have the right to be heard. Those committing fraud have the right to go to jail! If George Soros is involved, the SEIU is involved, the ACORN people involved, throw them in jail! If Barney Frank is involved, Chris Dodd involved, Andy Stern or Obama himself involved, throw them in jail!
5) Revoke the incandescent light bulb law. We should be able to choose which kind of light bulb we have and the same goes for vehicles, washing machines, toilets, etc.! Get out of our wallets and out of our personal choices.
6) Remove Eric Holder as the U.S. Attorney General and stop all lawsuits of America vs. any U.S. state due to immigration laws. The States have the right to make their own laws. That’s set forth in the U.S. Constitution’s Article IV. The States have the right to make their own laws, to enforce those laws and to protect their residents – the U.S. Citizens – from anyone who will do them harm.
7) Make a law allowing America to find, drill for and refine its own natural resource oil, and any other natural resources that will enable America to build businesses here, make jobs here, be independent of other countries for our own resources and to be able to thumb our noses at OPEC nations, at Hugo Chavez, or anyone else who thinks that America should be kept dependent upon their country or company in order to have the resources we need to be able to function as a free and independent country.
8) Start impeachment proceedings against Barack Hussein Obama. He has broken his Oath of Office to “uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution” – not just once, but many, many times over with his socialist actions. Socialism is not part of the U.S. Constitution, yet Obama has made it his goal – nay, his life’s work – to destroy America and to tear down the very fabric of our lives and make America into a thing unrecognizable as a land of freedom and (dare I say it?) hope; a land where other aspire to come in order to live as only the freedom that America used to promise would allow. That dream, under Obama, has quickly become a distant memory and a whispered about “remember when”. That is not what he swore to do on his Inauguration Day. He swore – in front of the American people and the world – to uphold and defend America: America’s history, her freedoms, her promise, her goals as set forth by the Founding Father’s when he swore to “uphold and defend” our U.S. Constitution. He has not done that. He has done everything in his power – and some things that technically were NOT in his power – to remove America from its vaunted place in the world’s lexicon and to make America into a socialist third world power that is nothing like what we were set up to be. America used to be considered the best nation on earth and in less than two short years, Obama has changed that to America being considered the eighth freest country on earth. That’s not just wrong, that’s evil.
So, that’s my list so far. IF the new, Conservatives coming into public office will do these things, America’s freedoms will be restored, the faith of the American people will be renewed and your elections will be justified. You will have deserved being elected.
If, however, you go along and get along and do nothing of these eight suggestions, I see no reason to have elected you instead of any Obama kiss-ahem flunkie.
Do the right thing, Conservatives. Do the right thing and return freedom to America, return the purpose of America to the ideals of the Founding Fathers. Remember liberty and restore it.
1) De-fund every position that was created by the health care reform bill and revoke it immediately. This will ensure that the taxpayers’ money is not spent on administration of the bill that should have never passed because the vast majority of us did not want it anyways. Progressives love to talk about the “democracy” (i.e., majority rule) that they think is the law of the land, but when it comes to governing against the majority of the people with health care reform, they didn’t listen to the majority of the people. Remove the funding for every position created in this bill: every secretary, administrator, every computer person, every janitor.
2) De-fund every czar position that Obama has created. No more money should be given to people who have unconstitutional powers to create rules and regulations over us that we – without constitutional authority – have to obey. No internet czar, no food czar, no health care czar should receive a dime of taxpayer dollars after you are sworn in.
3) De-fund every bailout scheme. Any time the taxpayers of America are saddled with another bailout scheme – caulking windows to banks and car manufacturers – the taxpayer has no say in it and they are strapped with the debt that comes from it. Just stop that nonsense now. De-fund every scheme that the taxpayers are being made to pay. No more government involvement in business bailouts!
4) Do serious and complete investigations of the voter fraud that has happened during these 2010 elections as well as the 2008 elections – including this administration’s (and Eric Holder’s) decisions regarding the New Black Panther Party and their voter intimidation. Investigate every incident in Texas, Florida, Arizona, everywhere and anywhere in America there was voter fraud reported and make sure that there is someone held accountable. The American people no longer want their votes to be stolen from them, defrauded from them, their voices to be negated and silenced because – according to our Founding Fathers and the U.S. Constitution – we have the right to be heard. Those committing fraud have the right to go to jail! If George Soros is involved, the SEIU is involved, the ACORN people involved, throw them in jail! If Barney Frank is involved, Chris Dodd involved, Andy Stern or Obama himself involved, throw them in jail!
5) Revoke the incandescent light bulb law. We should be able to choose which kind of light bulb we have and the same goes for vehicles, washing machines, toilets, etc.! Get out of our wallets and out of our personal choices.
6) Remove Eric Holder as the U.S. Attorney General and stop all lawsuits of America vs. any U.S. state due to immigration laws. The States have the right to make their own laws. That’s set forth in the U.S. Constitution’s Article IV. The States have the right to make their own laws, to enforce those laws and to protect their residents – the U.S. Citizens – from anyone who will do them harm.
7) Make a law allowing America to find, drill for and refine its own natural resource oil, and any other natural resources that will enable America to build businesses here, make jobs here, be independent of other countries for our own resources and to be able to thumb our noses at OPEC nations, at Hugo Chavez, or anyone else who thinks that America should be kept dependent upon their country or company in order to have the resources we need to be able to function as a free and independent country.
8) Start impeachment proceedings against Barack Hussein Obama. He has broken his Oath of Office to “uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution” – not just once, but many, many times over with his socialist actions. Socialism is not part of the U.S. Constitution, yet Obama has made it his goal – nay, his life’s work – to destroy America and to tear down the very fabric of our lives and make America into a thing unrecognizable as a land of freedom and (dare I say it?) hope; a land where other aspire to come in order to live as only the freedom that America used to promise would allow. That dream, under Obama, has quickly become a distant memory and a whispered about “remember when”. That is not what he swore to do on his Inauguration Day. He swore – in front of the American people and the world – to uphold and defend America: America’s history, her freedoms, her promise, her goals as set forth by the Founding Father’s when he swore to “uphold and defend” our U.S. Constitution. He has not done that. He has done everything in his power – and some things that technically were NOT in his power – to remove America from its vaunted place in the world’s lexicon and to make America into a socialist third world power that is nothing like what we were set up to be. America used to be considered the best nation on earth and in less than two short years, Obama has changed that to America being considered the eighth freest country on earth. That’s not just wrong, that’s evil.
So, that’s my list so far. IF the new, Conservatives coming into public office will do these things, America’s freedoms will be restored, the faith of the American people will be renewed and your elections will be justified. You will have deserved being elected.
If, however, you go along and get along and do nothing of these eight suggestions, I see no reason to have elected you instead of any Obama kiss-ahem flunkie.
Do the right thing, Conservatives. Do the right thing and return freedom to America, return the purpose of America to the ideals of the Founding Fathers. Remember liberty and restore it.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Health Care Scam?
Received a scanned image from a friend September 25, 2010. That image made me go webcrawling because it made me go, "Hmmm... That's not right." The image is of the letter my friend received from the
Research Triangle Institute and, to me, it's very questionable.
Why is it "very questionable"? First: Why on earth does the U.S. Government have to hire outside help to perform a U.S. Public Health Services survey? That's the header on the page; it's the U.S.P.H.S. letterhead. Why use an outside source to do this? After all, they have the resources and they have employees, or they could hire people to do the work without getting a third person involved. Why hire someone else to do this? And, why at this time (more on that later)?
Second: If you read the letter, they say that the people being interviewed are going to -- if qualified to participate in the actual survey (more on that later) -- receive thirty dollars each. There could be multiple people in the same household "chosen to participate", thus there could be almost one hundred dollars in the household given to people to answer questions regarding "health-related issues". So over 6 million taxpayer dollars are given to RTI to go house to house and ask "health-related issues" questions. Will you really be answering "health-related issues" questions, or will they be more related to something else?
Third: RTI states,
"Our activities both mirror and support national priorities and policies as well as diverse commercial, industrial, and academic endeavors." If they "both mirror and support" why choose them to give $6 million dollars walking around money to, when the administration could have and should have chosen an organization that is neutral. (BTW, was this contract put out to bid and if so, how many people/companies bid on this contract? What were the other bids? Who owns those other companies? What are the other companies' affiations [Soros?]?) Why choose an organization whose stated goals are "to mirror and support"? Why not choose a neutral organization unless there's a specific purpose to send the surveyors out to accomplish?
Fourth: Why the initial questions before you are "qualified" to participate? Are they looking for someone specific to give the money to? Someone, perhaps, who may be swayed by a little extra cash before they decide to vote for or against a certain person or idea? Why not just question everyone about their "health-related issues"? After all, we all have at least one thing to be thinking about, don't we? If we are healthy, we want to stay that way. If we are sick, we want to get treatment. If we are pregnant, we want a healthy baby and a good pregnancy and easy delivery. We all have "health-related issues" so why do they need to pre-screen the participants who will receive the thirty dollars? Is there another reason to do so?
Fifth: This survey is being conducted just prior to a mid-term election in which many of those who voted for shoving "health care reform" down our throats will be up for reelection. Where will these surveys be taking place: in whose districts? Will it be nationwide, no matter what? Or will it be only in those districts whose Senators/Congresspeople are facing defeat after voting in favor of "health care reform"? Isn't "healt care reform" a "health-related issue"? How many of those chosen to participate and receive that $30 will be those who will vote for the candidate up for reelection after they get that money? Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas, is having a difficult time due to her support and vote in favor of "health care reform". Is it coincidence that the surveys are being conducted here?
Sixth: How accountable are the people walking around with this money going to be to the taxpayers? Will they be keeping copious records? Will they be getting identification, Social Security numbers, drivers' license numbers, or any other type of record-enabling thing? What is the surveyor's responsibility to the taxpayer since they already have the money? Or will it be something that they can go spend the money however they wish once they get out into the neighborhood and there will be no accounting?
Seventh: Will they be bonded, licensed, insured? Will they be vetted prior to them being given identification and told to enter people's homes under the auspices of the federal government program they are working for? Or will it be similar to the U.S. Census in which several Census workers were found to be sex offenders after they had been employed by the Census? Or will they be more careful this time?
Will you be safe? Will your children be safe?
Eighth: Why do people need to be cleared to answer questions? Is there a set of particular people they are trying to question: i.e., is the survey being weighted? For instance: If they are trying to get people who were not going to vote for Kosmas to participate in the survey and they ask questions like, "Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas voted for the health care reform act. Does this tend to make you want to vote for Kosmas or against Kosmas?" Remember, it is a "health-related issues" survey. That question is related to health-related issues. After all, if it weren't for the people who voted for shoving the "Health Care Enslavement Act of 2010" we wouldn't have had that change and we wouldn't be facing the future difficulties we now are.
Ninth: If this information is being collected for "only for statistical purposes" why do the people need to be paid? And why screen people with initial questions? Why not ask the people in the household the questions, no matter their possible answers to the initial questions? Obviously, they are looking for a specific answer, a specific group of people, a specific result. So what result are they looking for? What statistic are they trying to secure: support for the "health care reform" supidity, or support for the candidate who supported it?
Tenth: Is this another "jobs" scam, similar to the
U.S. Census jobs? Remember how the U.S. Census kept getting busted for hiring people, having them work slowly for a few days, firing them, then re-hiring them for another portion of the U.S. Census? Remember that ridiculousness that made the summer jobs numbers supposedly better? Remember how all of that worked out? How about this stuff? Will all those RTI "surveyors" be part of the federal jobs program? And, if so, how about those people who take the survey and receive government money for participating? Will this administration be counting the survey takers as "government employees" also? What will that do to jobs numbers?
Eleventh: What benefits will the government get -- or does someone else benefit -- from this information? Find out the questions these RTI employees are going to be asking: both the initial questions and the survey questions. That will tell you the truth about what this survey is going to be doing for the "statistical purposes" of this administration. What will it benefit the government: or who within the government will it benefit? If it's benefiting the government, shouldn't we also get some benefit? After all, it is your six million dollars that is being spent, shouldn't you get some benefit of some sort?
Twelth: If RTI's stated goals and purposes are to "both mirror and support national priorities and policies", and it's going to be for "statistical purposes" that this survey is done, why bother spending six million dollars on a survey to be done by a company that already "mirrors and supports" the administration anyways? Does this make sense to you? Isn't that a bit like paying for an outcome that is already predetermined? Why pay six million dollars for something that is going to get the expected results anyways? Does this make any sense to you? Or is this being done for other purposes? After all, we already have the government agency upon whose letterhead this letter is written. Why hire an outside agency and pay give them six million dollars of walking around money, not to mention paying the employees to do this survey, and the contract amount? Why?
Which leads me to the last question:
Thirteenth: Is this Obama sending taxpayer dollars to his friends via another shady deal? Take a look at who RTI is. See any connections with this administration? How about
the fact that they lobby in favor of the health care issue? (Be sure to check out all of the tabs there, especially the "Issues" and the information on the group's lobbyists and revolving door info.) Or maybe you should consider
Erskine Bowles, President of the University fo North Carolina, which is part of RTI. Remember him?
He's part of the Obama appointed "Debt Commission". Nah. Nothing to see there. Then consider this RTI brochure that includes the line: "Education Reform Support, Soros Foundation/Bulgarian Ministry of Education (1998–2000)". Soros? As in George Soros? Is Obama paying back Soros with millions of your taxpayer dollars for the support Soros gave Obama in getting elected? Just asking, folks. Just asking. One more to look at would be
page five of
this RTI brochure. It has Soros in the brochure, too, as well as an organization called "USAID". There were 1,610 Google® search results for "Research Triangle Institute USAID Soros". RTI is the organization whose employees (vetted employees?) will be entering your house to ask you "health-related issues" questions.
USAID is a U.S. government aid organization that spends billions of your taxpayer dollars worldwide to help other nations. RTI is connected to USAID, to George Soros and has a history -- according to their own website -- of "mirror[ing] and support[ing}" the Obama administration. How much of your taxpayer dollars should be spent on a frivolous survey that an existing organization could conduct instead of giving Obama's supporters over six million dollars of your money to do the job?
I got the letter from a longtime friend who legitimately received it in the mail. He wasn't expecting to receive this letter, but he was not surprised to see that this administration was doing something so blatantly wrong. Thanks to my friend, I sent this information to Glenn Beck. I am also making sure Michelle Bachman and others know about it. I hope that they -- and that you -- will ask hard questions of the Obama administration and demand some real answers. Remember, it's your money. It's your right to ask questions about it and it's your right to demand that the government answer those questions. Contact the USPHS (they're the ones whose letterhead the letter is on) and
ask the USPHS why this survey, why now, and why RTI? Ask them under the the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Demand answers. It's your right to know.
Then, when you've asked the USPHS,
ask Obama, too. Use the FOIA to your advantage and get answers. Don't accept, "It's just a survey" as an answer. Find the TRUTH!
Research Triangle Institute and, to me, it's very questionable.
Why is it "very questionable"? First: Why on earth does the U.S. Government have to hire outside help to perform a U.S. Public Health Services survey? That's the header on the page; it's the U.S.P.H.S. letterhead. Why use an outside source to do this? After all, they have the resources and they have employees, or they could hire people to do the work without getting a third person involved. Why hire someone else to do this? And, why at this time (more on that later)?
Second: If you read the letter, they say that the people being interviewed are going to -- if qualified to participate in the actual survey (more on that later) -- receive thirty dollars each. There could be multiple people in the same household "chosen to participate", thus there could be almost one hundred dollars in the household given to people to answer questions regarding "health-related issues". So over 6 million taxpayer dollars are given to RTI to go house to house and ask "health-related issues" questions. Will you really be answering "health-related issues" questions, or will they be more related to something else?
Third: RTI states,
"Our activities both mirror and support national priorities and policies as well as diverse commercial, industrial, and academic endeavors." If they "both mirror and support" why choose them to give $6 million dollars walking around money to, when the administration could have and should have chosen an organization that is neutral. (BTW, was this contract put out to bid and if so, how many people/companies bid on this contract? What were the other bids? Who owns those other companies? What are the other companies' affiations [Soros?]?) Why choose an organization whose stated goals are "to mirror and support"? Why not choose a neutral organization unless there's a specific purpose to send the surveyors out to accomplish?
Fourth: Why the initial questions before you are "qualified" to participate? Are they looking for someone specific to give the money to? Someone, perhaps, who may be swayed by a little extra cash before they decide to vote for or against a certain person or idea? Why not just question everyone about their "health-related issues"? After all, we all have at least one thing to be thinking about, don't we? If we are healthy, we want to stay that way. If we are sick, we want to get treatment. If we are pregnant, we want a healthy baby and a good pregnancy and easy delivery. We all have "health-related issues" so why do they need to pre-screen the participants who will receive the thirty dollars? Is there another reason to do so?
Fifth: This survey is being conducted just prior to a mid-term election in which many of those who voted for shoving "health care reform" down our throats will be up for reelection. Where will these surveys be taking place: in whose districts? Will it be nationwide, no matter what? Or will it be only in those districts whose Senators/Congresspeople are facing defeat after voting in favor of "health care reform"? Isn't "healt care reform" a "health-related issue"? How many of those chosen to participate and receive that $30 will be those who will vote for the candidate up for reelection after they get that money? Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas, is having a difficult time due to her support and vote in favor of "health care reform". Is it coincidence that the surveys are being conducted here?
Sixth: How accountable are the people walking around with this money going to be to the taxpayers? Will they be keeping copious records? Will they be getting identification, Social Security numbers, drivers' license numbers, or any other type of record-enabling thing? What is the surveyor's responsibility to the taxpayer since they already have the money? Or will it be something that they can go spend the money however they wish once they get out into the neighborhood and there will be no accounting?
Seventh: Will they be bonded, licensed, insured? Will they be vetted prior to them being given identification and told to enter people's homes under the auspices of the federal government program they are working for? Or will it be similar to the U.S. Census in which several Census workers were found to be sex offenders after they had been employed by the Census? Or will they be more careful this time?
Will you be safe? Will your children be safe?
Eighth: Why do people need to be cleared to answer questions? Is there a set of particular people they are trying to question: i.e., is the survey being weighted? For instance: If they are trying to get people who were not going to vote for Kosmas to participate in the survey and they ask questions like, "Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas voted for the health care reform act. Does this tend to make you want to vote for Kosmas or against Kosmas?" Remember, it is a "health-related issues" survey. That question is related to health-related issues. After all, if it weren't for the people who voted for shoving the "Health Care Enslavement Act of 2010" we wouldn't have had that change and we wouldn't be facing the future difficulties we now are.
Ninth: If this information is being collected for "only for statistical purposes" why do the people need to be paid? And why screen people with initial questions? Why not ask the people in the household the questions, no matter their possible answers to the initial questions? Obviously, they are looking for a specific answer, a specific group of people, a specific result. So what result are they looking for? What statistic are they trying to secure: support for the "health care reform" supidity, or support for the candidate who supported it?
Tenth: Is this another "jobs" scam, similar to the
U.S. Census jobs? Remember how the U.S. Census kept getting busted for hiring people, having them work slowly for a few days, firing them, then re-hiring them for another portion of the U.S. Census? Remember that ridiculousness that made the summer jobs numbers supposedly better? Remember how all of that worked out? How about this stuff? Will all those RTI "surveyors" be part of the federal jobs program? And, if so, how about those people who take the survey and receive government money for participating? Will this administration be counting the survey takers as "government employees" also? What will that do to jobs numbers?
Eleventh: What benefits will the government get -- or does someone else benefit -- from this information? Find out the questions these RTI employees are going to be asking: both the initial questions and the survey questions. That will tell you the truth about what this survey is going to be doing for the "statistical purposes" of this administration. What will it benefit the government: or who within the government will it benefit? If it's benefiting the government, shouldn't we also get some benefit? After all, it is your six million dollars that is being spent, shouldn't you get some benefit of some sort?
Twelth: If RTI's stated goals and purposes are to "both mirror and support national priorities and policies", and it's going to be for "statistical purposes" that this survey is done, why bother spending six million dollars on a survey to be done by a company that already "mirrors and supports" the administration anyways? Does this make sense to you? Isn't that a bit like paying for an outcome that is already predetermined? Why pay six million dollars for something that is going to get the expected results anyways? Does this make any sense to you? Or is this being done for other purposes? After all, we already have the government agency upon whose letterhead this letter is written. Why hire an outside agency and pay give them six million dollars of walking around money, not to mention paying the employees to do this survey, and the contract amount? Why?
Which leads me to the last question:
Thirteenth: Is this Obama sending taxpayer dollars to his friends via another shady deal? Take a look at who RTI is. See any connections with this administration? How about
the fact that they lobby in favor of the health care issue? (Be sure to check out all of the tabs there, especially the "Issues" and the information on the group's lobbyists and revolving door info.) Or maybe you should consider
Erskine Bowles, President of the University fo North Carolina, which is part of RTI. Remember him?
He's part of the Obama appointed "Debt Commission". Nah. Nothing to see there. Then consider this RTI brochure that includes the line: "Education Reform Support, Soros Foundation/Bulgarian Ministry of Education (1998–2000)". Soros? As in George Soros? Is Obama paying back Soros with millions of your taxpayer dollars for the support Soros gave Obama in getting elected? Just asking, folks. Just asking. One more to look at would be
page five of
this RTI brochure. It has Soros in the brochure, too, as well as an organization called "USAID". There were 1,610 Google® search results for "Research Triangle Institute USAID Soros". RTI is the organization whose employees (vetted employees?) will be entering your house to ask you "health-related issues" questions.
USAID is a U.S. government aid organization that spends billions of your taxpayer dollars worldwide to help other nations. RTI is connected to USAID, to George Soros and has a history -- according to their own website -- of "mirror[ing] and support[ing}" the Obama administration. How much of your taxpayer dollars should be spent on a frivolous survey that an existing organization could conduct instead of giving Obama's supporters over six million dollars of your money to do the job?
I got the letter from a longtime friend who legitimately received it in the mail. He wasn't expecting to receive this letter, but he was not surprised to see that this administration was doing something so blatantly wrong. Thanks to my friend, I sent this information to Glenn Beck. I am also making sure Michelle Bachman and others know about it. I hope that they -- and that you -- will ask hard questions of the Obama administration and demand some real answers. Remember, it's your money. It's your right to ask questions about it and it's your right to demand that the government answer those questions. Contact the USPHS (they're the ones whose letterhead the letter is on) and
ask the USPHS why this survey, why now, and why RTI? Ask them under the the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Demand answers. It's your right to know.
Then, when you've asked the USPHS,
ask Obama, too. Use the FOIA to your advantage and get answers. Don't accept, "It's just a survey" as an answer. Find the TRUTH!
Friday, September 17, 2010
Obama's Religion: You Will Know Him By His Fruit
The question has recently arisen, "Is Obama a Muslim?" It's a fair and valid question. Knowing someone's religious beliefs -- true religious beliefs -- tells you something about that person.
In Matthew 7:16 we see these words, "You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" We see it elsewhere in the Bible as, "As the old saying goes, 'From evildoers come evil deeds,' so my hand will not touch you." (1 Samuel 24:13), or "My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water." (James 3:12), and, "Even a child is known by his actions, by whether his conduct is pure and right." (Proverbs 20:11).
Say, for instance, your brother just announced he has recently become a Catholic. You believe he is sincere in his statement because he has been honest with you in every instance of conversation and written communication previously, so you believe his conversion to Catholicism to be genuine. You now know that he has accepted as important and -- hopefully -- factual, the teachings of the Catholic Church. That tells you that he will now be doing some predictable things: using a rosary, praying certain prayers, going to certain church services, eating certain things (or not eating them), etc. You know that he is now going to be crossing himself, wearing a Crucifix instead of an empty cross; he'll be praying to Saints and Martyrs instead of just God via Jesus Christ. You know what to expect. You're familiar with the signs and "symptoms" of being a Catholic. If your brother does not do those things, then you can seriously doubt his conversion statement as being legitimate and sincere.
Same holds true of Obama being a Christian. Obama says he is a Christian. Therefore, according to the Bible, we should see certain things from him as far as his actions and words are concerned. We should see him going to a church that teaches and preaches the Bible as the loving word of God. Instead, he spent twenty years as a member and regular attendee of the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright's, "Not God Bless America, but God d**n America!" and "America's chickens are coming home to roost!" Sitting under tutelage like that for twenty years, having the "Rev." Wright perform your marriage ceremony and baptise your daughters: Christian fruit, or hatred?
Considering that he has left Chicago and is now in the Red House (used to be the White House until a Marxist/Communist occupied it), his church going has changed. He no longer regularly attends any church. In fact, in his first year in office, he attended church only three times. So church attendance is not something that labels him a Christian. Of course, there is no truth to the fact that everyone who attends church is a Christian, nor that anyone who does not attend church is not a Christian. So with that, I will cut him some leeway. However, I must make two observations on the story linked above. 1) We are told that Obama "prays every day." So do Muslims, some Atheists, Druids, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. "[P]ray[ing] every day" proves nothing toward or against Christianity. 2) Obama supposedly gets his daily Christian lessons on his Blackberry (instead of from his Bible, but okay), but that does not mean that he reads them. Ever hear him spontaneously and accurately quote an appropriate Bible verse? Spontaneously, now, not in a scripted speech? No? Nor have I.
Let's look at some other indicators. In Malachi 3:10 we see that we are supposed to bring our tithes "into the storehouse" in obedience to God to further His kingdom. Leviticus 27:30 says for us to tithe of "everything from the land" and we are taught that one tenth of every bit of our income is supposed to go to God -- before deductions and "adjusted income" is figured. We're supposed to tithe our gross income. According to Obama's charitable donations, we see only $250 went to a church or Christian foundation/organization. The rest of his donations -- even the money from his Pulitzer Prize -- went to other kinds of non-Christian organizations. Is that being obedient to God's word? Is that how he demonstrates with the fruit he bears how much he loves the God of the Bible?
Another consideration is the story he tells of his conversion experience. What does he say about that first moment when God knocked on Obama's heart and called Obama to be His son? Where was he? How did it feel? Who else was there? What did God say? Who did Obama tell first? What happened next inside Obama's heart? How did Obama's heart change? How did Obama's actions change? What was Obama's first desire regarding Obama's service to God? How was Obama's life made different? Has anyone ever heard it and did it sound anything at all like the truth? It is in one of his books that "he wrote of it" (I put that in quotes because I am not sure it was he who wrote those books, there is evidence he did not). If it be someone else's words, then this testimony is not necessarily Obama's testimony and considering that it is not elsewhere mentioned within the book, in fact quickly forgotten, and not in evidence today, I think that the fruit of that testimony is lacking in freshness. Many have a "conversion" that lasts but a moment and no more. Many go forward in church and some even go so far as to be baptized (sometimes even to prove something to a girl within the church, or similar non-Christian motives), but unless that conversion experience changes your heart and life so that you are truly different -- and we've seen no evidence of that -- then it is not a conversion, but a show.
Does someone professing Christianity respect the Bible, quote it correctly, and follow its precepts? Or does he quote the Koran and claim it's part of the Bible, and mock the Bible? If the latter, then I would definitely say it's okay to doubt one's supposed Christianity because that person is mocking God. A true Christian does not mock God because a true Christian would be horrified at the idea of doing so, and would be too scared of the consequences. Someone who says they are a Christian would know better than to mock God. The fruit of that tree is total annhiliation via God's wrath, not the growth of God's kingdom. If the good fruit comes from the good tree, then the tree Obama is planting is a tree of death.
Questioning Obama's Christianity is legitimate because of the fact that he is hateful toward Christianity as a whole. Remember his quote, "it's not surprising that they cling to guns or religion"? Sorry, but a Christian would say that? Would a Christian say that it isn't surprising that people would be Christians? He said that it isn't "surprising that they cling to guns or religion". A Christian would down being a Christian? Is that the fruit of a good tree, or is that a thorn from a thorn tree?
Something else to take into consideration as a "fruit" is, if he is a Christian, does he preach what he supposedly practices? Does he tell others that it's good to be a Christian? Does he follow the Great Commission in Matthew 28:16-20 -- is Obama a witness for Christ? Or does Obama say he is still a Muslim and that the Islamic call to prayer is the one of the prettiest sounds on earth? Not every Christian is an evangelist, true, but there are things God calls us to do -- the things mentioned above, amongst others -- that are all witnesses of Christ. It's how we profess our Christianity in our daily walk, as well as with our mouths that speaks to others. If Obama is a Christian, why do so many Americans -- and others throughout the world -- believe him to be otherwise when they consider the way he lives, talks, treats others and governs? Where is the impression that he is a Christian for those who are closest to him, or furthest from him?
Another consideration is the people Obama is appointing as his advisors, czars and cabinet members. Does he appoint Christians, or does he appoint Communists, Marxists and other atheists? Does Obama surround himself with solid Christian counsel, or does he surround himself with those who hate the Lord? If he surrounds himself with those who hate the Lord, where are the converts Obama has made with his Christian witness? Where are the people saying that Obama's Christian leadership and godly counsel helped save their marriage, or that his prayer brought healing to their child's illness? Where is the "cloud of witnesses" to attest to Obama's Christianity? Who does he surround himself with and when do they become his "cloud of witnesses" to Obama's love of Jesus Christ, Obama's Lord and Savior?
When President Bush was in office, he attended a Christian church regularly and few doubted he was a Christian. He spontaneously prayed with people, he was approachable and people knew he cared. He quoted the Bible not just in prepared speeches, but in his everyday language. President Bush was a known entity and hated for being so outspoken a Christian. Do a Google® search for "George W. Bush Christian" and see how many sites come up that spew hatred for Bush and his Christianity. It amazed me. When you look at Obama's supposed Christianity, then it's we who have to take Obama's word for it, and -- even though he mocks us and he scorns us and denies America is a Christian nation -- we are supposed to take Obama's word that he is a Christian.
I beg to differ. When the Bible tells us what to look for, what facts to consider, what obedience is (tithing, praying, fasting, witnessing, etc.), and we see none of the fruit the Bible tells us to take into consideration, then we can make an educated -- and Biblical -- decision that Obama is not a Christian. After all, what true Christian would ever have the "slip up" of saying, "my Muslim faith"? I think that speaks volumes in and of itself.
So, is Obama a Christian? I think the Bible makes the final call on that. In Matthew 7:21 it says, "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." I think "Lord, Lord" is Obama's act: doing the will of God "which is in heaven" is Obama's failing.
In Matthew 7:16 we see these words, "You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" We see it elsewhere in the Bible as, "As the old saying goes, 'From evildoers come evil deeds,' so my hand will not touch you." (1 Samuel 24:13), or "My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water." (James 3:12), and, "Even a child is known by his actions, by whether his conduct is pure and right." (Proverbs 20:11).
Say, for instance, your brother just announced he has recently become a Catholic. You believe he is sincere in his statement because he has been honest with you in every instance of conversation and written communication previously, so you believe his conversion to Catholicism to be genuine. You now know that he has accepted as important and -- hopefully -- factual, the teachings of the Catholic Church. That tells you that he will now be doing some predictable things: using a rosary, praying certain prayers, going to certain church services, eating certain things (or not eating them), etc. You know that he is now going to be crossing himself, wearing a Crucifix instead of an empty cross; he'll be praying to Saints and Martyrs instead of just God via Jesus Christ. You know what to expect. You're familiar with the signs and "symptoms" of being a Catholic. If your brother does not do those things, then you can seriously doubt his conversion statement as being legitimate and sincere.
Same holds true of Obama being a Christian. Obama says he is a Christian. Therefore, according to the Bible, we should see certain things from him as far as his actions and words are concerned. We should see him going to a church that teaches and preaches the Bible as the loving word of God. Instead, he spent twenty years as a member and regular attendee of the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright's, "Not God Bless America, but God d**n America!" and "America's chickens are coming home to roost!" Sitting under tutelage like that for twenty years, having the "Rev." Wright perform your marriage ceremony and baptise your daughters: Christian fruit, or hatred?
Considering that he has left Chicago and is now in the Red House (used to be the White House until a Marxist/Communist occupied it), his church going has changed. He no longer regularly attends any church. In fact, in his first year in office, he attended church only three times. So church attendance is not something that labels him a Christian. Of course, there is no truth to the fact that everyone who attends church is a Christian, nor that anyone who does not attend church is not a Christian. So with that, I will cut him some leeway. However, I must make two observations on the story linked above. 1) We are told that Obama "prays every day." So do Muslims, some Atheists, Druids, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. "[P]ray[ing] every day" proves nothing toward or against Christianity. 2) Obama supposedly gets his daily Christian lessons on his Blackberry (instead of from his Bible, but okay), but that does not mean that he reads them. Ever hear him spontaneously and accurately quote an appropriate Bible verse? Spontaneously, now, not in a scripted speech? No? Nor have I.
Let's look at some other indicators. In Malachi 3:10 we see that we are supposed to bring our tithes "into the storehouse" in obedience to God to further His kingdom. Leviticus 27:30 says for us to tithe of "everything from the land" and we are taught that one tenth of every bit of our income is supposed to go to God -- before deductions and "adjusted income" is figured. We're supposed to tithe our gross income. According to Obama's charitable donations, we see only $250 went to a church or Christian foundation/organization. The rest of his donations -- even the money from his Pulitzer Prize -- went to other kinds of non-Christian organizations. Is that being obedient to God's word? Is that how he demonstrates with the fruit he bears how much he loves the God of the Bible?
Another consideration is the story he tells of his conversion experience. What does he say about that first moment when God knocked on Obama's heart and called Obama to be His son? Where was he? How did it feel? Who else was there? What did God say? Who did Obama tell first? What happened next inside Obama's heart? How did Obama's heart change? How did Obama's actions change? What was Obama's first desire regarding Obama's service to God? How was Obama's life made different? Has anyone ever heard it and did it sound anything at all like the truth? It is in one of his books that "he wrote of it" (I put that in quotes because I am not sure it was he who wrote those books, there is evidence he did not). If it be someone else's words, then this testimony is not necessarily Obama's testimony and considering that it is not elsewhere mentioned within the book, in fact quickly forgotten, and not in evidence today, I think that the fruit of that testimony is lacking in freshness. Many have a "conversion" that lasts but a moment and no more. Many go forward in church and some even go so far as to be baptized (sometimes even to prove something to a girl within the church, or similar non-Christian motives), but unless that conversion experience changes your heart and life so that you are truly different -- and we've seen no evidence of that -- then it is not a conversion, but a show.
Does someone professing Christianity respect the Bible, quote it correctly, and follow its precepts? Or does he quote the Koran and claim it's part of the Bible, and mock the Bible? If the latter, then I would definitely say it's okay to doubt one's supposed Christianity because that person is mocking God. A true Christian does not mock God because a true Christian would be horrified at the idea of doing so, and would be too scared of the consequences. Someone who says they are a Christian would know better than to mock God. The fruit of that tree is total annhiliation via God's wrath, not the growth of God's kingdom. If the good fruit comes from the good tree, then the tree Obama is planting is a tree of death.
Questioning Obama's Christianity is legitimate because of the fact that he is hateful toward Christianity as a whole. Remember his quote, "it's not surprising that they cling to guns or religion"? Sorry, but a Christian would say that? Would a Christian say that it isn't surprising that people would be Christians? He said that it isn't "surprising that they cling to guns or religion". A Christian would down being a Christian? Is that the fruit of a good tree, or is that a thorn from a thorn tree?
Something else to take into consideration as a "fruit" is, if he is a Christian, does he preach what he supposedly practices? Does he tell others that it's good to be a Christian? Does he follow the Great Commission in Matthew 28:16-20 -- is Obama a witness for Christ? Or does Obama say he is still a Muslim and that the Islamic call to prayer is the one of the prettiest sounds on earth? Not every Christian is an evangelist, true, but there are things God calls us to do -- the things mentioned above, amongst others -- that are all witnesses of Christ. It's how we profess our Christianity in our daily walk, as well as with our mouths that speaks to others. If Obama is a Christian, why do so many Americans -- and others throughout the world -- believe him to be otherwise when they consider the way he lives, talks, treats others and governs? Where is the impression that he is a Christian for those who are closest to him, or furthest from him?
Another consideration is the people Obama is appointing as his advisors, czars and cabinet members. Does he appoint Christians, or does he appoint Communists, Marxists and other atheists? Does Obama surround himself with solid Christian counsel, or does he surround himself with those who hate the Lord? If he surrounds himself with those who hate the Lord, where are the converts Obama has made with his Christian witness? Where are the people saying that Obama's Christian leadership and godly counsel helped save their marriage, or that his prayer brought healing to their child's illness? Where is the "cloud of witnesses" to attest to Obama's Christianity? Who does he surround himself with and when do they become his "cloud of witnesses" to Obama's love of Jesus Christ, Obama's Lord and Savior?
When President Bush was in office, he attended a Christian church regularly and few doubted he was a Christian. He spontaneously prayed with people, he was approachable and people knew he cared. He quoted the Bible not just in prepared speeches, but in his everyday language. President Bush was a known entity and hated for being so outspoken a Christian. Do a Google® search for "George W. Bush Christian" and see how many sites come up that spew hatred for Bush and his Christianity. It amazed me. When you look at Obama's supposed Christianity, then it's we who have to take Obama's word for it, and -- even though he mocks us and he scorns us and denies America is a Christian nation -- we are supposed to take Obama's word that he is a Christian.
I beg to differ. When the Bible tells us what to look for, what facts to consider, what obedience is (tithing, praying, fasting, witnessing, etc.), and we see none of the fruit the Bible tells us to take into consideration, then we can make an educated -- and Biblical -- decision that Obama is not a Christian. After all, what true Christian would ever have the "slip up" of saying, "my Muslim faith"? I think that speaks volumes in and of itself.
So, is Obama a Christian? I think the Bible makes the final call on that. In Matthew 7:21 it says, "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." I think "Lord, Lord" is Obama's act: doing the will of God "which is in heaven" is Obama's failing.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
You Have "The Dream", Just Pick It Up!
After all of the fussing over the Glenn Beck “Restoring Honor” rally “stealing”, or “hijacking” the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., message, I read Dr. King’s “I Have A Dream” speech. What I saw in the speech surprised me. I have heard it several times, but by no means did I ever memorize it. A sentence or two stuck with me, but nothing close to the whole thing. Thus, reading it was something that would serve me well. A good idea and it was very interesting.
In that speech – whose message and idea were no more “hijacked” by Glenn Beck than the Lincoln Memorial was that day – I see that Glenn Beck was actually fulfilling that speech and Al Sharpton, et al, have no right to complain about it.
For instance, in his speech, Dr. King – who stood at the Lincoln Memorial but in a different spot than Beck – said this, “the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.” While there is no guarantee that former slaves and former slave holders were there or that if they were there, that they were together, there were both black and white at the rally and there was peace and brotherhood at the Restoring Honor rally.
Dr. King’s dream included the, “state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.” Mississippi is just that, as is the rest of America. And his dream included his “four little children” being judged “by the content of their character”, not the color of their skin. I think his four little children have been judged thusly. As has his niece, Dr. Alveda King, who spoke of her “Uncle Martin” at the Beck rally. Her character is impeccable and her voice for the Lord is loud and strong. “[I]n Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.” This has come true, as well; not just holding hands, but “mixed” marriages also have become accepted as a normal thing, instead of a shock and scandal, a shame to both families.
Dr. King’s dream, however, did not include government housing being a standard freebie for every person of color who wanted to sit idly at home and do nothing but watch soap operas or talk on their welfare check purchased cell phone. It did not include “free” health care for all because it is never “free” and someone will have to pay for it; that someone being those who do work and pay their taxes. Dr. King’s dream never mentioned food stamps, a “right” to a job, legalized drugs like crack cocaine or marijuana. Dr. King’s dream had none of the “give it to me, I want it” in it that permeates the Al Sharptons of this world.
Dr. King’s dream spoke of one thing: Freedom. Not freedom from want, freedom from envy, freedom from someone else having more, better, bigger, easier than you; freedom to strive and work for what it is that someone else has that you desire. Dr. King’s dream never said you would be given it because you deserve it – after all, you had it bad, your dad had a tough road, your great-grandfather was a slave so now you deserve everything you want and you deserve to have it given to you by the sweat of someone else’s brow. Freedom is none of that. Freedom is the right to work hard and make your own way and to keep the results of your labor, or to decide for yourself what to do with those results. That is freedom.
The right to work is not the same as a right to a job. The right to work means that you have the right – as a citizen of the United States of America – to try to get a job and to be paid equally for that job as someone else with the same qualifications, same experience, same education and same level of expertise. You have that right. If you have those criteria met and you and I are going up for the same position, you do not have the right to get the job because of the color of your skin, but you do have the right to get the job if you have worked harder than I, put in longer hours than I, learned more about the position we both want, than I know. That’s the same criteria used for me getting the position as well, though, so if I get the job, I deserved it; not the color of my skin deserved it. Thus, you have no “right” to a job, but you do have the right to work. No one should interfere with you trying to be hired somewhere at a job you are qualified to do. Just as no one should interfere with me being hired somewhere for a job I am qualified to do. The key word there being “qualified”: whoever is most qualified should get the job and skin color should be ignored.
For someone to say that it is their “right” to government housing, welfare, food stamps, health care, or any other thing besides the right – true right, not made up right – to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” is just a lie. It means nothing legally and it should never have happened morally. Admittedly, America’s past did include racism and slavery; mostly due to the Democratic Party, but it was there. But does that past – and it is the past – give anyone the “right” to anything from those who had no part in that past? Do you pay for your grandfather’s sins, or just your own? Should you be jailed for your brother’s illegal activities, or just your own?
For anyone to claim “right” to what I have now because of someone else’s sins, is not just unfair, it is purely immoral. I had no part in slavery or in the racism of the sixties and earlier. I was not old enough to be part of either of those things, and my ancestors immigrated to America long after slavery was over, so my family had no part in that, either. Should I have to pay for the things that other people did when my family had no part whatsoever in the wrongs done by others? If so, is that not just another form of racism?
For Al Sharpton and the rally he led “reclaiming Dr. King’s message” was not just a falsehood, it was probably making Dr. King roll over in his grave. Considering the messages I heard when I watched the two hours or more of the Sharpton rally that I was able to stomach, I saw speakers demand that they be “given” this, they “deserve” that, I truly doubt they had read Dr. King’s famous words in light of how Dr. King meant them, instead of just trying to change the speech to their best advantage. They forgot the line, “Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.” And they left out, “We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence.” They ignore his statement, “Let us not wallow in the valley of despair” and to that “despair” they add anger, resentment, envy, self-righteousness, a feeling of “being owed”, the demand of “give it to me and give it to me now!”
Sharpton’s event was not of the same kind as Dr. King would have had. Sharpton preached all that King decried. Sharpton wants those who follow him to be in that place Dr. King did not want people: kept down by their own desire to have it handed to them instead of paying for it with the money earned from their own labor, kept enslaved by their own desire to make someone else “pay” – both in monetary payments and in societal retribution – for their own lack, ignoring the fact that their lack was their own doing, not someone else’s fault.
Sharpton, et al, don’t want their followers to realize that the dream Dr. King spoke so eloquently of is already theirs. If that were not the case, how could there be have been U.S. Supreme Court Justices who were black, a president who is black, U.S. Senators and Congresspersons of color, millionaires in America who are descendants of slaves? If the dream is not already given, how is there a black television network, black advertising agencies, or black owners of a hair product line for black people; how is Don King rich1? If the dream is not accomplished, if everyone does not have the equal right and equal chance to work hard, to seek their own legal path (illegal paths to riches are not part of the dream), then how are the accomplishments of so many black people explained away?
“Uncle Tom” will be cried; but it’s a false cry and they know it. It’s a convenient pejorative and nothing more. It helps keep black people “in their place” to have another black call them that. It’s a signal, “You better not step out of line, mister. You know we don’t want you doing that because it makes us look bad!” It’s not about the accomplishments of the achiever; it’s about the laziness and excuses of the non-achiever. It’s a slaver’s cry to trap someone who could achieve if given the support needed into the “Uncle Tom” crier’s own level of “under-achievement”. It is a leveler: none can do better than this because if one does, then we all can and we all don’t want to so you better not.
That false cry is their own jailer, their own limiter as are Sharpton and his words and demands. If the government and the people don’t do “X” for the black people, then it won’t get done because – according to Sharpton’s words – they can’t do it for themselves. Does this sound anything at all like the “I Have A Dream” speech of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or does it sound like someone seeking to keep others down so he can be considered their spokesperson, helper, saint, rescuer? Sharpton no more wants people of his race to be capable achievers than he wants to be a nobody, ignored, overlooked, forgotten and that is why he must keep the lies going, the false accusations flowing, the hatred, despair and envy spewing from every mouth at every rally he leads, attends or feeds. It is not a “Dream” Sharpton has for the success and freedom of his people it is his worst nightmare for then he becomes nothing and vanishes into the dust from whence he came.
Sharpton and his ilk do not want people to realize that Dr. King’s dream has already been handed to them. Today they have the dream as Dr. King envisioned it. All they have to do is reach out and take it, pick it up. It’s that big, beautifully wrapped present over there. Go over and pick it up and see your name on it. Realize that with that present in hand you can do anything legal in America you dream of – go to school and get the education you desire, work at the job you are qualified to work at, save for your own retirement and pay your own way and live the life you want instead of watching and hating as others live the life you desire – as long as you believe in that dream and accept it for yourself. You see, there’s the rub. You must accept that dream for yourself, and no one else can do it for you.
That’s why those like Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and others will never tell you that the dream is already yours. They know that if you realize it, they will not be able to milk you for support – financial and political– for their own ideas, their own desire for the dream. Look at them, though, aren’t they living the dream while telling you that it isn’t available at all? Sharpton himself wears expensive suits, lives in an expensive house, flies all over the country and attends “the best” parties. If he’s living the dream while preaching that America has not yet delivered it, then who is he lying to? Considering that the answer to that question is “You”, don’t you think you need to sit down and figure out what the truth is?
1) http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/index.php/archives/2004/600/
In that speech – whose message and idea were no more “hijacked” by Glenn Beck than the Lincoln Memorial was that day – I see that Glenn Beck was actually fulfilling that speech and Al Sharpton, et al, have no right to complain about it.
For instance, in his speech, Dr. King – who stood at the Lincoln Memorial but in a different spot than Beck – said this, “the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.” While there is no guarantee that former slaves and former slave holders were there or that if they were there, that they were together, there were both black and white at the rally and there was peace and brotherhood at the Restoring Honor rally.
Dr. King’s dream included the, “state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.” Mississippi is just that, as is the rest of America. And his dream included his “four little children” being judged “by the content of their character”, not the color of their skin. I think his four little children have been judged thusly. As has his niece, Dr. Alveda King, who spoke of her “Uncle Martin” at the Beck rally. Her character is impeccable and her voice for the Lord is loud and strong. “[I]n Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.” This has come true, as well; not just holding hands, but “mixed” marriages also have become accepted as a normal thing, instead of a shock and scandal, a shame to both families.
Dr. King’s dream, however, did not include government housing being a standard freebie for every person of color who wanted to sit idly at home and do nothing but watch soap operas or talk on their welfare check purchased cell phone. It did not include “free” health care for all because it is never “free” and someone will have to pay for it; that someone being those who do work and pay their taxes. Dr. King’s dream never mentioned food stamps, a “right” to a job, legalized drugs like crack cocaine or marijuana. Dr. King’s dream had none of the “give it to me, I want it” in it that permeates the Al Sharptons of this world.
Dr. King’s dream spoke of one thing: Freedom. Not freedom from want, freedom from envy, freedom from someone else having more, better, bigger, easier than you; freedom to strive and work for what it is that someone else has that you desire. Dr. King’s dream never said you would be given it because you deserve it – after all, you had it bad, your dad had a tough road, your great-grandfather was a slave so now you deserve everything you want and you deserve to have it given to you by the sweat of someone else’s brow. Freedom is none of that. Freedom is the right to work hard and make your own way and to keep the results of your labor, or to decide for yourself what to do with those results. That is freedom.
The right to work is not the same as a right to a job. The right to work means that you have the right – as a citizen of the United States of America – to try to get a job and to be paid equally for that job as someone else with the same qualifications, same experience, same education and same level of expertise. You have that right. If you have those criteria met and you and I are going up for the same position, you do not have the right to get the job because of the color of your skin, but you do have the right to get the job if you have worked harder than I, put in longer hours than I, learned more about the position we both want, than I know. That’s the same criteria used for me getting the position as well, though, so if I get the job, I deserved it; not the color of my skin deserved it. Thus, you have no “right” to a job, but you do have the right to work. No one should interfere with you trying to be hired somewhere at a job you are qualified to do. Just as no one should interfere with me being hired somewhere for a job I am qualified to do. The key word there being “qualified”: whoever is most qualified should get the job and skin color should be ignored.
For someone to say that it is their “right” to government housing, welfare, food stamps, health care, or any other thing besides the right – true right, not made up right – to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” is just a lie. It means nothing legally and it should never have happened morally. Admittedly, America’s past did include racism and slavery; mostly due to the Democratic Party, but it was there. But does that past – and it is the past – give anyone the “right” to anything from those who had no part in that past? Do you pay for your grandfather’s sins, or just your own? Should you be jailed for your brother’s illegal activities, or just your own?
For anyone to claim “right” to what I have now because of someone else’s sins, is not just unfair, it is purely immoral. I had no part in slavery or in the racism of the sixties and earlier. I was not old enough to be part of either of those things, and my ancestors immigrated to America long after slavery was over, so my family had no part in that, either. Should I have to pay for the things that other people did when my family had no part whatsoever in the wrongs done by others? If so, is that not just another form of racism?
For Al Sharpton and the rally he led “reclaiming Dr. King’s message” was not just a falsehood, it was probably making Dr. King roll over in his grave. Considering the messages I heard when I watched the two hours or more of the Sharpton rally that I was able to stomach, I saw speakers demand that they be “given” this, they “deserve” that, I truly doubt they had read Dr. King’s famous words in light of how Dr. King meant them, instead of just trying to change the speech to their best advantage. They forgot the line, “Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.” And they left out, “We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence.” They ignore his statement, “Let us not wallow in the valley of despair” and to that “despair” they add anger, resentment, envy, self-righteousness, a feeling of “being owed”, the demand of “give it to me and give it to me now!”
Sharpton’s event was not of the same kind as Dr. King would have had. Sharpton preached all that King decried. Sharpton wants those who follow him to be in that place Dr. King did not want people: kept down by their own desire to have it handed to them instead of paying for it with the money earned from their own labor, kept enslaved by their own desire to make someone else “pay” – both in monetary payments and in societal retribution – for their own lack, ignoring the fact that their lack was their own doing, not someone else’s fault.
Sharpton, et al, don’t want their followers to realize that the dream Dr. King spoke so eloquently of is already theirs. If that were not the case, how could there be have been U.S. Supreme Court Justices who were black, a president who is black, U.S. Senators and Congresspersons of color, millionaires in America who are descendants of slaves? If the dream is not already given, how is there a black television network, black advertising agencies, or black owners of a hair product line for black people; how is Don King rich1? If the dream is not accomplished, if everyone does not have the equal right and equal chance to work hard, to seek their own legal path (illegal paths to riches are not part of the dream), then how are the accomplishments of so many black people explained away?
“Uncle Tom” will be cried; but it’s a false cry and they know it. It’s a convenient pejorative and nothing more. It helps keep black people “in their place” to have another black call them that. It’s a signal, “You better not step out of line, mister. You know we don’t want you doing that because it makes us look bad!” It’s not about the accomplishments of the achiever; it’s about the laziness and excuses of the non-achiever. It’s a slaver’s cry to trap someone who could achieve if given the support needed into the “Uncle Tom” crier’s own level of “under-achievement”. It is a leveler: none can do better than this because if one does, then we all can and we all don’t want to so you better not.
That false cry is their own jailer, their own limiter as are Sharpton and his words and demands. If the government and the people don’t do “X” for the black people, then it won’t get done because – according to Sharpton’s words – they can’t do it for themselves. Does this sound anything at all like the “I Have A Dream” speech of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or does it sound like someone seeking to keep others down so he can be considered their spokesperson, helper, saint, rescuer? Sharpton no more wants people of his race to be capable achievers than he wants to be a nobody, ignored, overlooked, forgotten and that is why he must keep the lies going, the false accusations flowing, the hatred, despair and envy spewing from every mouth at every rally he leads, attends or feeds. It is not a “Dream” Sharpton has for the success and freedom of his people it is his worst nightmare for then he becomes nothing and vanishes into the dust from whence he came.
Sharpton and his ilk do not want people to realize that Dr. King’s dream has already been handed to them. Today they have the dream as Dr. King envisioned it. All they have to do is reach out and take it, pick it up. It’s that big, beautifully wrapped present over there. Go over and pick it up and see your name on it. Realize that with that present in hand you can do anything legal in America you dream of – go to school and get the education you desire, work at the job you are qualified to work at, save for your own retirement and pay your own way and live the life you want instead of watching and hating as others live the life you desire – as long as you believe in that dream and accept it for yourself. You see, there’s the rub. You must accept that dream for yourself, and no one else can do it for you.
That’s why those like Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and others will never tell you that the dream is already yours. They know that if you realize it, they will not be able to milk you for support – financial and political– for their own ideas, their own desire for the dream. Look at them, though, aren’t they living the dream while telling you that it isn’t available at all? Sharpton himself wears expensive suits, lives in an expensive house, flies all over the country and attends “the best” parties. If he’s living the dream while preaching that America has not yet delivered it, then who is he lying to? Considering that the answer to that question is “You”, don’t you think you need to sit down and figure out what the truth is?
1) http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/index.php/archives/2004/600/
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Sam's House Grand Opening!
Sam's House Grand Opening on Saturday, August 21st, at 10:30 a.m. on Merritt Island in the Pine Island Conservation Area at 6195 North Tropical Trail. Info on its location is here.
Although it IS a Parks & Recs/EELs project, it is no longer listed on the Brevard County Parks & Recs Central Area website page. Nor is it listed on the EELs Calendar Page. However, I do have a printout about it from an e-mail someone sent around. I wonder why?
In case you were wondering: Yes, this invitation is a bit facetious. I post it to let you know that it is happening, but I want you to know that you are being treated differently than those who would support this effort. Did you get an e-mail from them with the invitation? No? Your money was spent on this project. You paid for it, but you don't get invited to attend, or even have it posted somewhere for you to find? Is that "fair and equal treatment under the law"? I don't think so. If the people in the "Friends of Ulumay", "Audubon Society", "Space Coast Progressive Alliance", or any other progressive, leftists, tree hugging, Scrub Jay worshipping group gets notified to be there, why didn't you?
That's why I posted this invitation. I want you to know that it's happening so you can attend and ask them why you were not notified of the event and you were not allowed to find out about it without my spreading the word. Attend. Ask them. Hold their feet to the fire. It's your money. Hold them accountable.
Although it IS a Parks & Recs/EELs project, it is no longer listed on the Brevard County Parks & Recs Central Area website page. Nor is it listed on the EELs Calendar Page. However, I do have a printout about it from an e-mail someone sent around. I wonder why?
In case you were wondering: Yes, this invitation is a bit facetious. I post it to let you know that it is happening, but I want you to know that you are being treated differently than those who would support this effort. Did you get an e-mail from them with the invitation? No? Your money was spent on this project. You paid for it, but you don't get invited to attend, or even have it posted somewhere for you to find? Is that "fair and equal treatment under the law"? I don't think so. If the people in the "Friends of Ulumay", "Audubon Society", "Space Coast Progressive Alliance", or any other progressive, leftists, tree hugging, Scrub Jay worshipping group gets notified to be there, why didn't you?
That's why I posted this invitation. I want you to know that it's happening so you can attend and ask them why you were not notified of the event and you were not allowed to find out about it without my spreading the word. Attend. Ask them. Hold their feet to the fire. It's your money. Hold them accountable.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Education: Prevention of Tyranny
In reading the book, “The Coming Insurrection” by The Invisible Committee I found quite a few things that I saw happening here in America. Used as part of the evidence in an anti-terrorism case in France, this book tells us how the progressives think. They believe in anarchy, completely and totally: until they get what they want. Then everything changes. What is it they want? They want to be in charge.
They don’t want “equality”. That’s for the bourgeoisie. They don’t want “freedom”. That’s for those who think too small. They want anarchy: murder, mayhem, burning whole cities if necessary to put them in charge. They’ll do what they think is needed in order to get it. They will kill police forces, murder innocents (for they are the only innocents; everyone cooperating with the capitalists are guilty), burn, loot, break, steal. Anarchy helps put them in charge and you are the servants who will do as their bidding tells you. Their egos demand it. Their self-gratification, self-aggrandizement craves it; it’s the driving force and their raison d’être. Nothing shall stand in their way. If you think you are part of them – even though they have used you, met with you, applauded you, dined with you -- you are wrong. Not only are you wrong, but you are a useful puppet that is to be discarded and thrown away as soon as your usefulness is gone. Some credit Stalin or Lenin with the phrase, “Useful Idiots”. I don’t know who came up with it, but does it surprise anyone that it was either one of those two dictators who coined the phrase? They used people the same way then discarded them as their usefulness came to an end. Their “discarding” meant a bullet through the head, but let’s not get picky. This is, after all, the twenty-first century. No one kills someone just because they are no longer “useful”. Right?
On page 124 of this little blue book, it states, “The circulation of knowledge hierarchy; it equalizes by raising up.” The Committee is talking about planning insurrections, attacks, fires, anarchy, but they inadvertently tell you the truth about their whole philosophy. If you educate the “proletariat” (the working class people), you raise them up. Education equals a better life. The anarchists – the Stalinists and Leninists – don’t want you raised up, don’t want you educated. If you get a better education, then you can figure out what they are up to. You can see through their plans and think things through yourselves. You won’t have to rely on them to tell you what they are doing is “good for you”. You’ll be able to see for yourselves that what they are doing is not good for you, but bad for you and will keep you poor, dependent and without being able to have a future you wish to have unless they “give” it to you.
The Democrats have always hated the idea of allowing school vouchers for the poorest children in any school district. They have fought against a good education for years. If your child is in a failing school in a poor district, your child is stuck. They can no more move to a private school than I can be a quantum physics professor. I don’t know how to do that sort of math; my brain doesn’t work that way. But your child’s brain may, and without interference if given the chance, you could put your child into a private school via vouchers and your child would have a brighter, better future. This is something Democrats don’t want. The less education your child has, the more likely they are to vote for Democrats. Imagine Condoleeza Rice, Dr. Thomas Sowell, Justice Clarence Thomas, or Dr. Walter Williams voting for Democrats. It doesn’t happen because they are well educated and they have the ability to think for themselves.
A quick side note here: Some call the people above “Uncle Toms” because they don’t stay on the Democratic vote plantation and keep “Massah” in power via obedience, subservience and vote. This is not just nonsense, it is stupidity. Any person can be a dolt and vote for people who are going to keep them down, to keep them poor, subservient. It takes a smart person, someone with courage, strength and discernment to not vote for the “Massah”. If the Dr. Thomas Sowells of this world are “Uncle Toms”, then what does that make you: the idiot Uncle Toms? A quick recalling of the story reminds us that it’s a false moniker anyways. After all, an “Uncle Tom” label would mean to me that someone was a person of faith, for that was the main characteristic of Uncle Tom in Harriett Beecher Stowe’s book. So by saying that people are “Uncle Toms”, they are being accused of nothing more than faith in Christ? OOoohhhh. Bad people. Bad. Don’t a lot of you go to church and profess a belief in God, too? Enough of that side note: back to the real subject matter.
When someone – anyone -- wants you to stay uneducated, to not know the truth, to be ill informed, to not have all the facts, it’s not because they trust you to make your own choices. It’s not because they trust you to make the correct choice. It’s because they think you will choose something that does not benefit them if you do have all the information, all the facts, a better education. That’s how politicians stay in office. Teddy Kennedy didn’t want you to have a better education because he wanted you to not know how inept he was. Check out his voting record on education here: Ted Kennedy. I think that speaks volumes. Let’s check someone else’s record Barbara Boxer’s record is that she voted “NO” on School Vouchers and on Education Savings Accounts. Another Democrat? Okay, how about Harry Reid? He also voted against School Vouchers and Education Savings Accounts, so that people whose children were in poorly performing Washington D.C. schools would be unable to move their children out of those schools. Nancy Pelosi joined Reid, Boxer and Kennedy in voting against School Vouchers and Education Savings Accounts. Pete Stark voted "No" on School Vouchers, Maxine Waters ditto. Our current president doesn’t like School Vouchers, either. All Democrats.
In “The Coming Insurrection”, they write about the anarchy that is heading our way. They write openly and – one must suppose – honestly about how they want to destroy our current civilization and create a new civilization of communism; organization without government, just with themselves in charge. This is the talk of someone whose ego has gotten the better of them and who is a dangerous individual. That is why they are on trial in France: sedition is a crime in most countries. When those preaching this kind of anarchy – Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Bernardine Dohrn, you know: Obama’s buddies, associates and closest friends – try to intimidate others with the idea of their inferiority – and lack of education is in their minds an “inferiority” – and they tell people that they – the “Ruling Class” – know best, know what is “good for you”, they are banking on your lack of knowledge, insight and street smarts. If you keep them in political power, you prove them correct about you. When you continue to vote for those who want to keep you on welfare, keep you on the government checks (W.I.C. program, food stamps, government housing; “free” this, that and the other), you are proving to them that you are capable of being bought. You are proving to them that you are disinterested in having more, being better, being smarter, having a brighter future. All you want is to be on “easy street” and have everything handed to you on a silver platter.
I’ve got news for you, “Silver Platter Boy/Girl”. It’s not free, there is no silver platter and your vote comes at too high a price. When the ultimate goal is reached and they are in power, you will be the first to go, the first “useful idiot” who will be out of their realm. Their eyes will be pained by seeing you and they will discard you as quickly as Marie Antoinette is rumored to have said, “Let them eat cake”. Your entire life will be nothing but dross for them and you will be forfeit. After all, if you are that stupid, you will be a drain on them, on their plans, on their power because they will be continually slowing down to bring you up with the other folks, those who are more educated and who think as they and are willing accomplices, not useful idiots. Your “government teat mentality” will then be hooked upon their “government teat” and they don’t want to feed you when it is their account that pays for it. Otherwise, how do you explain why conservatives give so much more to charitable causes than liberals? Conservatives give 30% more than liberals: don’t you think that trend will continue once they are controlling the world as well? Leopards don’t change their spots. Do you think that just because you are somehow “special” that you will be the exception rather than the rule, and they will enjoy taking care of you when they are in power? Look in that mirror again, “Silver Platter Boy/Girl”. You ain’t that special. After all, “People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.” If you are voting for those who believe in “social justice”, you are more than scre**d.
Stop and think, people. If you want to believe that those who are saying, “We’ll take care of you, vote Democratic” are actually going to take care of you, you are wrong. They want to keep you stupid, down, attached at the wallet to the government and to keep you subservient, therefore controlling you. After all, when someone is paying for everything you have because you’re too lazy, or inept to provide for yourself, if that’s not controlled – puppetted, your definition of “Uncle Tommed”, under their thumb – I don’t know what is.
Get a good education. Fight for it. Prepare for life via a real education. I don’t mean an education that will teach you the same things the Democrats are doing and telling you and controlling you with (preparing you to control others the same way: that’s tyranny, not leadership). I mean an education that will teach you to stand on your own two feet, think for yourselves, think critically, think logically (not circular logic; not illogic), and to be ready to argue with your betters for your point of view, beliefs and political stances: and win. If you can do that, you have a great education and you are ready for this world and ready to lead in it, not just sit back and allow others to dictate for whom you should vote.
Tyranny has many faces: the first shown is a lack of education, for tyranny will always use that as a whip against you. If someone is trying to prevent your education, you know their wishes for your future are not good and that, sooner or later, it will come down to tyranny with you on the receiving end.
They don’t want “equality”. That’s for the bourgeoisie. They don’t want “freedom”. That’s for those who think too small. They want anarchy: murder, mayhem, burning whole cities if necessary to put them in charge. They’ll do what they think is needed in order to get it. They will kill police forces, murder innocents (for they are the only innocents; everyone cooperating with the capitalists are guilty), burn, loot, break, steal. Anarchy helps put them in charge and you are the servants who will do as their bidding tells you. Their egos demand it. Their self-gratification, self-aggrandizement craves it; it’s the driving force and their raison d’être. Nothing shall stand in their way. If you think you are part of them – even though they have used you, met with you, applauded you, dined with you -- you are wrong. Not only are you wrong, but you are a useful puppet that is to be discarded and thrown away as soon as your usefulness is gone. Some credit Stalin or Lenin with the phrase, “Useful Idiots”. I don’t know who came up with it, but does it surprise anyone that it was either one of those two dictators who coined the phrase? They used people the same way then discarded them as their usefulness came to an end. Their “discarding” meant a bullet through the head, but let’s not get picky. This is, after all, the twenty-first century. No one kills someone just because they are no longer “useful”. Right?
On page 124 of this little blue book, it states, “The circulation of knowledge hierarchy; it equalizes by raising up.” The Committee is talking about planning insurrections, attacks, fires, anarchy, but they inadvertently tell you the truth about their whole philosophy. If you educate the “proletariat” (the working class people), you raise them up. Education equals a better life. The anarchists – the Stalinists and Leninists – don’t want you raised up, don’t want you educated. If you get a better education, then you can figure out what they are up to. You can see through their plans and think things through yourselves. You won’t have to rely on them to tell you what they are doing is “good for you”. You’ll be able to see for yourselves that what they are doing is not good for you, but bad for you and will keep you poor, dependent and without being able to have a future you wish to have unless they “give” it to you.
The Democrats have always hated the idea of allowing school vouchers for the poorest children in any school district. They have fought against a good education for years. If your child is in a failing school in a poor district, your child is stuck. They can no more move to a private school than I can be a quantum physics professor. I don’t know how to do that sort of math; my brain doesn’t work that way. But your child’s brain may, and without interference if given the chance, you could put your child into a private school via vouchers and your child would have a brighter, better future. This is something Democrats don’t want. The less education your child has, the more likely they are to vote for Democrats. Imagine Condoleeza Rice, Dr. Thomas Sowell, Justice Clarence Thomas, or Dr. Walter Williams voting for Democrats. It doesn’t happen because they are well educated and they have the ability to think for themselves.
A quick side note here: Some call the people above “Uncle Toms” because they don’t stay on the Democratic vote plantation and keep “Massah” in power via obedience, subservience and vote. This is not just nonsense, it is stupidity. Any person can be a dolt and vote for people who are going to keep them down, to keep them poor, subservient. It takes a smart person, someone with courage, strength and discernment to not vote for the “Massah”. If the Dr. Thomas Sowells of this world are “Uncle Toms”, then what does that make you: the idiot Uncle Toms? A quick recalling of the story reminds us that it’s a false moniker anyways. After all, an “Uncle Tom” label would mean to me that someone was a person of faith, for that was the main characteristic of Uncle Tom in Harriett Beecher Stowe’s book. So by saying that people are “Uncle Toms”, they are being accused of nothing more than faith in Christ? OOoohhhh. Bad people. Bad. Don’t a lot of you go to church and profess a belief in God, too? Enough of that side note: back to the real subject matter.
When someone – anyone -- wants you to stay uneducated, to not know the truth, to be ill informed, to not have all the facts, it’s not because they trust you to make your own choices. It’s not because they trust you to make the correct choice. It’s because they think you will choose something that does not benefit them if you do have all the information, all the facts, a better education. That’s how politicians stay in office. Teddy Kennedy didn’t want you to have a better education because he wanted you to not know how inept he was. Check out his voting record on education here: Ted Kennedy. I think that speaks volumes. Let’s check someone else’s record Barbara Boxer’s record is that she voted “NO” on School Vouchers and on Education Savings Accounts. Another Democrat? Okay, how about Harry Reid? He also voted against School Vouchers and Education Savings Accounts, so that people whose children were in poorly performing Washington D.C. schools would be unable to move their children out of those schools. Nancy Pelosi joined Reid, Boxer and Kennedy in voting against School Vouchers and Education Savings Accounts. Pete Stark voted "No" on School Vouchers, Maxine Waters ditto. Our current president doesn’t like School Vouchers, either. All Democrats.
In “The Coming Insurrection”, they write about the anarchy that is heading our way. They write openly and – one must suppose – honestly about how they want to destroy our current civilization and create a new civilization of communism; organization without government, just with themselves in charge. This is the talk of someone whose ego has gotten the better of them and who is a dangerous individual. That is why they are on trial in France: sedition is a crime in most countries. When those preaching this kind of anarchy – Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Bernardine Dohrn, you know: Obama’s buddies, associates and closest friends – try to intimidate others with the idea of their inferiority – and lack of education is in their minds an “inferiority” – and they tell people that they – the “Ruling Class” – know best, know what is “good for you”, they are banking on your lack of knowledge, insight and street smarts. If you keep them in political power, you prove them correct about you. When you continue to vote for those who want to keep you on welfare, keep you on the government checks (W.I.C. program, food stamps, government housing; “free” this, that and the other), you are proving to them that you are capable of being bought. You are proving to them that you are disinterested in having more, being better, being smarter, having a brighter future. All you want is to be on “easy street” and have everything handed to you on a silver platter.
I’ve got news for you, “Silver Platter Boy/Girl”. It’s not free, there is no silver platter and your vote comes at too high a price. When the ultimate goal is reached and they are in power, you will be the first to go, the first “useful idiot” who will be out of their realm. Their eyes will be pained by seeing you and they will discard you as quickly as Marie Antoinette is rumored to have said, “Let them eat cake”. Your entire life will be nothing but dross for them and you will be forfeit. After all, if you are that stupid, you will be a drain on them, on their plans, on their power because they will be continually slowing down to bring you up with the other folks, those who are more educated and who think as they and are willing accomplices, not useful idiots. Your “government teat mentality” will then be hooked upon their “government teat” and they don’t want to feed you when it is their account that pays for it. Otherwise, how do you explain why conservatives give so much more to charitable causes than liberals? Conservatives give 30% more than liberals: don’t you think that trend will continue once they are controlling the world as well? Leopards don’t change their spots. Do you think that just because you are somehow “special” that you will be the exception rather than the rule, and they will enjoy taking care of you when they are in power? Look in that mirror again, “Silver Platter Boy/Girl”. You ain’t that special. After all, “People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.” If you are voting for those who believe in “social justice”, you are more than scre**d.
Stop and think, people. If you want to believe that those who are saying, “We’ll take care of you, vote Democratic” are actually going to take care of you, you are wrong. They want to keep you stupid, down, attached at the wallet to the government and to keep you subservient, therefore controlling you. After all, when someone is paying for everything you have because you’re too lazy, or inept to provide for yourself, if that’s not controlled – puppetted, your definition of “Uncle Tommed”, under their thumb – I don’t know what is.
Get a good education. Fight for it. Prepare for life via a real education. I don’t mean an education that will teach you the same things the Democrats are doing and telling you and controlling you with (preparing you to control others the same way: that’s tyranny, not leadership). I mean an education that will teach you to stand on your own two feet, think for yourselves, think critically, think logically (not circular logic; not illogic), and to be ready to argue with your betters for your point of view, beliefs and political stances: and win. If you can do that, you have a great education and you are ready for this world and ready to lead in it, not just sit back and allow others to dictate for whom you should vote.
Tyranny has many faces: the first shown is a lack of education, for tyranny will always use that as a whip against you. If someone is trying to prevent your education, you know their wishes for your future are not good and that, sooner or later, it will come down to tyranny with you on the receiving end.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Freedom's Indelible Ink
Our Declaration of Independence written by our Founding Fathers and sent to King George III of Great Britain, states in part,
“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.”
Our Founding Fathers were intelligent, thoughtful, insightful men to have understood (without psychiatrists or sociologists) that people, on the whole, will put up with a lot more than they should because people understand that it’s not easy, “prudent” or a “light and transient” (brief) thing to change a form of government for little matters. One doesn’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
Our Founding Fathers also realized that they had been putting up with a lot of guff – big guff -- and they made a list of all the grievances they had against King George III. That list is included within the Declaration of Independence. The list of grievances is twenty-nine items long: a lot of guff to tolerate from a tyrant so far away. One is left to wonder if King George III had been closer – say in Washington, D.C., for instance – if the Founding Fathers would have suffered evil so patiently. After all, if they had been near enough to go talk eye to eye, toe to toe with the man and make some demands of him, would they have tolerated those twenty-nine usurpations?
When Obama started out with all the promises of “Hope” and “Change”, it would have been nice to have had some sort of notification as to what sort of “Change” he would bring. Socialism and/or Marxism are not welcome entities within a free country: and America used to be free. When we have someone who is trying their darnedest to restrain freedom, to destroy our future, to tax us into oblivion -- Cloward and Piven and the Weatherman Underground plans being put into effect – we obviously have someone in the White House (now known as the “Red” House), we cannot trust. Obama is doing things similar to the things that King George III did that brought about the first Revolution, the first call to freedom.
Ronald Reagan once said, “You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.”
I wonder what Reagan would say if he saw what our country has done to itself just twenty-one short years after he left the Presidency. We have gone from an icon of freedom, hope, strength and purpose -- whose strength brought down the Berlin Wall and brought the fresh breeze of freedom to a suffocating people -- to a Marxist who hates America and wants to make Reagan’s quote a success in the latter part of the second sentence: give our children “the first step into a thousand years of darkness.”
Considering the list of twenty-nine things King George III was doing wrong, we see that Obama is doing (at the very least) eleven of the same reasons that America’s Founding Fathers – and the people of the Colonies at the time – declared their independence from King George III and his tyranny. When the time was right for America, the people rebelled. In a long, hard fought war, we lost many battles, but in the end, freedom won and King George III was defeated. The cry of freedom rising in the hearts of many here determined that they would no longer live subject to anyone who would do the kinds of things King George III was doing.
The cry of freedom is rising again today. You can see it in the Tea Party movement: not just in their numbers, but in their diversity, their creativity, their strength of heart. When the human heart realizes it lost some of the freedom it had formerly known – via 9/11 and “Homeland Security” measures, or via a Marxist tyrant – every heart yearns to return to that former freedom. Once experienced, freedom leaves an indelible mark upon the human heart and that mark cannot be taken away, covered over, or ignored. It shines in the darkness like a beacon of hope, delight and energy that takes away our breath and makes us determined to recapture the freedoms that were lost. Freedom’s indelible ink remains upon us from the days of Ronald Reagan and from those days freedom’s mark beats within us: strong, proud, eternal.
As in the days of the Declaration of Independence when our Founding Fathers heard freedom’s cry and stood to give America that second-most precious gift, today our hearts cry out once more for that sweet, sweet taste, the lingering taste of freedom left by Ronald Reagan. It’s in the dedication, respect and memories we see reflected in the books we still buy about him, the posters we still hang, the quotes we still use. Those words -- so simple, so elegant, so true – that brought tears to our eyes, hope to our hearts, and stirred within us the determination to never let that spark of freedom – that unequalled light, that star so bright, that yearning of every human soul – leave this great land.
Our Founding Fathers gave us the tools, the example, the truth. Reagan gave those of us not alive in the time of our Founding Fathers the taste of indelible ink that branded every true American heart and burnt within us an embers’ glow of freedom’s eternal spark. Within the hearts of every true American beats that rhythm of freedom’s cry. The rhythm of patience, of belief that it won’t get worse, of desire to obey the law, but knowing that if it came to it, the law must be broken as our Founding Fathers showed us in the struggle to bring our America into existence and to let that spark burn into a new country, a new hope, a new beginning for freedom’s light.
Ronald Reagan said of America in his farewell address, “After 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true to the granite ridge, and her glow has held no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.”
As freedom’s indelible ink has left its mark, Ronald Reagan’s message was freedom’s true voice, its Liberty Bell cry of “Let Freedom Ring!” American hearts are now hearing that cry. They pull restlessly at the bit and paw anxiously at the ground, awaiting that time when we can stand no more and the Declaration of Independence’s phrase, “Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed” will give way to the very next sentence in that august document of liberty:
“But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.”
There are others out there who have freedom’s indelible ink upon their hearts. Others who know that “it is the Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government”. As long as we have that spark and are willing to stand up and fight for it, to fan it into a great, roaring flame that beckons once again to those throughout the earth who would be free, there will be no tyrant powerful enough, no “Change” permanent enough, no “Hope” strong enough, to prevent freedom from once again shining in this land.
Freedom calls and every human heart answers, whether in actions, words or just a silent, still desire because tyranny rules the land, every heart answers. It is the inborn cry that God planted and little experiences of the slightest kind – music that stirs the heart, a poem that lights the spark, a blog that rings the bell – bring that spark of freedom’s indelible ink to life and hope is born.
Indelible ink and freedom’s call delight the soul and mortal heart. For freedom comes from God and it is His desire that we live free, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32), is the call of freedom straight from God’s own plan. That is why it calls so persistently to those who will listen, to those with indelible ink. Freedom’s call, freedom’s mark, freedom’s spark stirs and beckons and God smiles because He is the One who gave it.
We have suffered the evils of Marxism and tyranny’s plans being implemented long enough. Freedom’s indelible ink calls and an answer it demands!
“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.”
Our Founding Fathers were intelligent, thoughtful, insightful men to have understood (without psychiatrists or sociologists) that people, on the whole, will put up with a lot more than they should because people understand that it’s not easy, “prudent” or a “light and transient” (brief) thing to change a form of government for little matters. One doesn’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
Our Founding Fathers also realized that they had been putting up with a lot of guff – big guff -- and they made a list of all the grievances they had against King George III. That list is included within the Declaration of Independence. The list of grievances is twenty-nine items long: a lot of guff to tolerate from a tyrant so far away. One is left to wonder if King George III had been closer – say in Washington, D.C., for instance – if the Founding Fathers would have suffered evil so patiently. After all, if they had been near enough to go talk eye to eye, toe to toe with the man and make some demands of him, would they have tolerated those twenty-nine usurpations?
When Obama started out with all the promises of “Hope” and “Change”, it would have been nice to have had some sort of notification as to what sort of “Change” he would bring. Socialism and/or Marxism are not welcome entities within a free country: and America used to be free. When we have someone who is trying their darnedest to restrain freedom, to destroy our future, to tax us into oblivion -- Cloward and Piven and the Weatherman Underground plans being put into effect – we obviously have someone in the White House (now known as the “Red” House), we cannot trust. Obama is doing things similar to the things that King George III did that brought about the first Revolution, the first call to freedom.
Ronald Reagan once said, “You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.”
I wonder what Reagan would say if he saw what our country has done to itself just twenty-one short years after he left the Presidency. We have gone from an icon of freedom, hope, strength and purpose -- whose strength brought down the Berlin Wall and brought the fresh breeze of freedom to a suffocating people -- to a Marxist who hates America and wants to make Reagan’s quote a success in the latter part of the second sentence: give our children “the first step into a thousand years of darkness.”
Considering the list of twenty-nine things King George III was doing wrong, we see that Obama is doing (at the very least) eleven of the same reasons that America’s Founding Fathers – and the people of the Colonies at the time – declared their independence from King George III and his tyranny. When the time was right for America, the people rebelled. In a long, hard fought war, we lost many battles, but in the end, freedom won and King George III was defeated. The cry of freedom rising in the hearts of many here determined that they would no longer live subject to anyone who would do the kinds of things King George III was doing.
The cry of freedom is rising again today. You can see it in the Tea Party movement: not just in their numbers, but in their diversity, their creativity, their strength of heart. When the human heart realizes it lost some of the freedom it had formerly known – via 9/11 and “Homeland Security” measures, or via a Marxist tyrant – every heart yearns to return to that former freedom. Once experienced, freedom leaves an indelible mark upon the human heart and that mark cannot be taken away, covered over, or ignored. It shines in the darkness like a beacon of hope, delight and energy that takes away our breath and makes us determined to recapture the freedoms that were lost. Freedom’s indelible ink remains upon us from the days of Ronald Reagan and from those days freedom’s mark beats within us: strong, proud, eternal.
As in the days of the Declaration of Independence when our Founding Fathers heard freedom’s cry and stood to give America that second-most precious gift, today our hearts cry out once more for that sweet, sweet taste, the lingering taste of freedom left by Ronald Reagan. It’s in the dedication, respect and memories we see reflected in the books we still buy about him, the posters we still hang, the quotes we still use. Those words -- so simple, so elegant, so true – that brought tears to our eyes, hope to our hearts, and stirred within us the determination to never let that spark of freedom – that unequalled light, that star so bright, that yearning of every human soul – leave this great land.
Our Founding Fathers gave us the tools, the example, the truth. Reagan gave those of us not alive in the time of our Founding Fathers the taste of indelible ink that branded every true American heart and burnt within us an embers’ glow of freedom’s eternal spark. Within the hearts of every true American beats that rhythm of freedom’s cry. The rhythm of patience, of belief that it won’t get worse, of desire to obey the law, but knowing that if it came to it, the law must be broken as our Founding Fathers showed us in the struggle to bring our America into existence and to let that spark burn into a new country, a new hope, a new beginning for freedom’s light.
Ronald Reagan said of America in his farewell address, “After 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true to the granite ridge, and her glow has held no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.”
As freedom’s indelible ink has left its mark, Ronald Reagan’s message was freedom’s true voice, its Liberty Bell cry of “Let Freedom Ring!” American hearts are now hearing that cry. They pull restlessly at the bit and paw anxiously at the ground, awaiting that time when we can stand no more and the Declaration of Independence’s phrase, “Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed” will give way to the very next sentence in that august document of liberty:
“But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.”
There are others out there who have freedom’s indelible ink upon their hearts. Others who know that “it is the Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government”. As long as we have that spark and are willing to stand up and fight for it, to fan it into a great, roaring flame that beckons once again to those throughout the earth who would be free, there will be no tyrant powerful enough, no “Change” permanent enough, no “Hope” strong enough, to prevent freedom from once again shining in this land.
Freedom calls and every human heart answers, whether in actions, words or just a silent, still desire because tyranny rules the land, every heart answers. It is the inborn cry that God planted and little experiences of the slightest kind – music that stirs the heart, a poem that lights the spark, a blog that rings the bell – bring that spark of freedom’s indelible ink to life and hope is born.
Indelible ink and freedom’s call delight the soul and mortal heart. For freedom comes from God and it is His desire that we live free, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32), is the call of freedom straight from God’s own plan. That is why it calls so persistently to those who will listen, to those with indelible ink. Freedom’s call, freedom’s mark, freedom’s spark stirs and beckons and God smiles because He is the One who gave it.
We have suffered the evils of Marxism and tyranny’s plans being implemented long enough. Freedom’s indelible ink calls and an answer it demands!
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Better a Beggar
Parameters:
Beggar: presumably, a homeless person who begs others for money, having no job and no money of their own. This is what I am referring to as "I" in this argument. I am not referring to any particular person or group of people who have ever been, are now, or will be in the future, homeless and/or out of work, and begging for their subsistence.
Government program: a program established by a government entity (Fed., State, County, or City) that provides housing, food, health care, or other "services" to someone who meets a set requirement to qualify for the program[s].
Welfare state: the time when as many people as possible in the U.S.A. will be on a government program that would provide "X" for the person without their having done anything to earn that particular "X" except fill out a form, be a U.S. citizen, or otherwise meet "Requirement R".
***
Recently, I was thinking about the welfare state that obamination is trying to push all of us into. I thought about the cost of such a process, the degeneration of our society, the cost in human dignity, the people who would pay for the benefits of others. While thinking about all of this, I realized something. I realized that I would not cooperate with such a process in any way, shape, or form. I must pay my taxes or go to jail, yes. But when it comes to signing up for those "incentives" to buy houses, or new cars, oil spill benefits, or pantyhose (oh, they haven't done that one yet?), I would not participate. Anything that is voluntary, I'm not volunteering for.
Why not? Because when I think about the cost of my soul, it's worth so much more than that. I cannot be bought like a cheap car. I cannot be bought with promises of $8,000 for a house purchase. I cannot be bought with anything obamination has to offer. All of his "offers" are not truly not offers, after all, and I will not add to my neighbor's burden -- even if they make more money than my family.
In fact, I decided, that it would be better to be a beggar than to be on any or all of those programs that the government has so readily pushed onto the American taxpayer's wallet.
How can I make such an absurd statement? Consider:
If you sign up for a government food program, you are getting food that you have no pride in earning the right to purchase, to have, to eat. All you have done is fill out the forms and met the bare minimum -- or the utmost, whichever -- requirements of the program to qualify. When in government programs, the government decides who is going to give to you and how much they shall give. It is not an independent choice made by the giver. It's government mandated and government enforced; taking away the giver's right to choose whether to give and how much, if giving.
If you sign up for a government housing program, you live in a house that someone else is paying for altogether, or that someone else subsidized. If you want to have pride of ownership, you cannot do it there because you didn't work to get it. You signed up. You have your neighbors and those throughout the country who work and pay taxes to thank for your house. It is not truly yours; it is theirs because they are paying for it, or helped pay for it.
If you sign up for a government health care (or is that he11-care?) program, you have no control over what kind of care you receive, over who you see, over what medications you receive, or when you get seen. You are stuck on their time table, their prescription regulations, their doctor list and their idea of "good care". Your neighbors, again, are forced to pay for you and you have them to thank for the generic drug that made you healthy last time, the name brand drug that was prescribed this time, and the lack of complete hospital care that you will receive when you are diagnosed with cancer and there is no room to keep you, or there is not enough money to treat you. You have no choice but to leave and go home to die.
Your neighbors and the rest of the country would pay for everything you have, everything you get, everything you want. You would pick my pocket, the pocket of every relative you have who works and every stranger in America who pas taxes in order to get from "the government" -- "We, the People". We would have no say, we would have no way to stop it except to quit working. We would not have the option of holding you accountable for the way you spend our money and we would not be able to say, "No! You've taken enough."
All of the things you have would be received via government form and without doing more work on your part besides paperwork. That gives you no sense of pride, no sense of accomplishment, no self-confidence; unless you would be proud to take from others so that you can sit on your backside all day, every day and get as much from the rest of us as you possibly can.
There are those out there who do just that. Where their dignity is, their self-esteem, their pride, I don't know. I just know that there are people out there with the mentality that they "deserve" everything they can get from the government, even if they cheat (lie on their forms) to get it. That, to me, is not a human being; they are the human worms who suck the life out of any economy as long as "the government" will give to them and they can sit on their backsides and do nothing to earn it.
That is not my idea of a good life, not my idea of "acceptable".
While if a beggar, I would have to get up off my duff every day and go out and -- at the very least -- have a sign that would ask people for their support. Whether they supported me or not would be their choice. I would not be taking a set amount from them because how much they gave me would be their choice as well. "Beggars can't be choosers" and I could not choose who gave to me -- family, friend, or foe: whoever would, would be welcome.
As a beggar, I would have to use the money I received from the good hearts of my fellow humans until it ran out and I would have to go out and ask for more. This, in its turn, would teach me something about gratefulness, about humility, about shame and pride. It would teach me about being careful with the money strangers gave me and to use it wisely for the things I need; not whatever I wanted. A budget would be imperative and it would be followed to the strictest "nth" degree. Every penny pinched, every dime made a dollar, so that I would not have to face the empty pocket at the end of the week and go out and ask strangers for more.
As a beggar, I would be forced to do what I legally and morally could to entice people to give me some of their money. Whether that be smiling sweetly, looking as pitiful as I can, changing the wording of the sign I used, or washing their car, it would be up to me to get them to agree to give to me. I would have to be creative, resourceful and capable of getting people to agree to give me some of their hard earned cash. This would either allow me to continue begging, or teach me something about entrepreneurship and encourage me to do something besides begging.
As a beggar, my family and friends and total strangers would not be forced to give to me, to support someone they had no say in supporting, and they would not be forced to give whatever dollar amount the federal (or State, County, or City) government took from them via taxes to support me in my government program houses, food, health care, etc. It would be a free choice of compassion and mercy on their part, allowing them to reap the spiritual and emotional benefits. As a beggar, my gratitude may be the only reward they received, but it would be eternal.
As a beggar, finding a safe, comfortable place to sleep would be my job, my desire, nightly. It would be upon my head if I wound up sleeping where I got rained upon, or if I was uncomfortable nightly. This would lead to my trying harder to get enough money to eat and to either find a shelter for homeless people that would have space for me, or to be able to rent a room so that I could sleep in a bed and not on the street.
As a beggar, while it would not be a matter of pride, at least I would not be looking at my neighbor and thinking that there is another program I can sign up for in order to have "X" as they do, or to be able to have "Y" as someone else does. Government programs would not be my failsafe, my "go to" relief: it would be myself on whom I would have to rely and that would be so much better than stealing from all of you.
That's why I think it would be better to be a beggar than to be on welfare, living in government housing, on food stamps, W.I.C. and other food programs, while getting Medicare/Medicaid to get health care and to snarl that I don't have enough. I want more and the government, "We, the People", should -- better! -- provide it. At least, as a beggar, I would be able to look you in the eye and not feel like a thief.
Beggar: presumably, a homeless person who begs others for money, having no job and no money of their own. This is what I am referring to as "I" in this argument. I am not referring to any particular person or group of people who have ever been, are now, or will be in the future, homeless and/or out of work, and begging for their subsistence.
Government program: a program established by a government entity (Fed., State, County, or City) that provides housing, food, health care, or other "services" to someone who meets a set requirement to qualify for the program[s].
Welfare state: the time when as many people as possible in the U.S.A. will be on a government program that would provide "X" for the person without their having done anything to earn that particular "X" except fill out a form, be a U.S. citizen, or otherwise meet "Requirement R".
***
Recently, I was thinking about the welfare state that obamination is trying to push all of us into. I thought about the cost of such a process, the degeneration of our society, the cost in human dignity, the people who would pay for the benefits of others. While thinking about all of this, I realized something. I realized that I would not cooperate with such a process in any way, shape, or form. I must pay my taxes or go to jail, yes. But when it comes to signing up for those "incentives" to buy houses, or new cars, oil spill benefits, or pantyhose (oh, they haven't done that one yet?), I would not participate. Anything that is voluntary, I'm not volunteering for.
Why not? Because when I think about the cost of my soul, it's worth so much more than that. I cannot be bought like a cheap car. I cannot be bought with promises of $8,000 for a house purchase. I cannot be bought with anything obamination has to offer. All of his "offers" are not truly not offers, after all, and I will not add to my neighbor's burden -- even if they make more money than my family.
In fact, I decided, that it would be better to be a beggar than to be on any or all of those programs that the government has so readily pushed onto the American taxpayer's wallet.
How can I make such an absurd statement? Consider:
If you sign up for a government food program, you are getting food that you have no pride in earning the right to purchase, to have, to eat. All you have done is fill out the forms and met the bare minimum -- or the utmost, whichever -- requirements of the program to qualify. When in government programs, the government decides who is going to give to you and how much they shall give. It is not an independent choice made by the giver. It's government mandated and government enforced; taking away the giver's right to choose whether to give and how much, if giving.
If you sign up for a government housing program, you live in a house that someone else is paying for altogether, or that someone else subsidized. If you want to have pride of ownership, you cannot do it there because you didn't work to get it. You signed up. You have your neighbors and those throughout the country who work and pay taxes to thank for your house. It is not truly yours; it is theirs because they are paying for it, or helped pay for it.
If you sign up for a government health care (or is that he11-care?) program, you have no control over what kind of care you receive, over who you see, over what medications you receive, or when you get seen. You are stuck on their time table, their prescription regulations, their doctor list and their idea of "good care". Your neighbors, again, are forced to pay for you and you have them to thank for the generic drug that made you healthy last time, the name brand drug that was prescribed this time, and the lack of complete hospital care that you will receive when you are diagnosed with cancer and there is no room to keep you, or there is not enough money to treat you. You have no choice but to leave and go home to die.
Your neighbors and the rest of the country would pay for everything you have, everything you get, everything you want. You would pick my pocket, the pocket of every relative you have who works and every stranger in America who pas taxes in order to get from "the government" -- "We, the People". We would have no say, we would have no way to stop it except to quit working. We would not have the option of holding you accountable for the way you spend our money and we would not be able to say, "No! You've taken enough."
All of the things you have would be received via government form and without doing more work on your part besides paperwork. That gives you no sense of pride, no sense of accomplishment, no self-confidence; unless you would be proud to take from others so that you can sit on your backside all day, every day and get as much from the rest of us as you possibly can.
There are those out there who do just that. Where their dignity is, their self-esteem, their pride, I don't know. I just know that there are people out there with the mentality that they "deserve" everything they can get from the government, even if they cheat (lie on their forms) to get it. That, to me, is not a human being; they are the human worms who suck the life out of any economy as long as "the government" will give to them and they can sit on their backsides and do nothing to earn it.
That is not my idea of a good life, not my idea of "acceptable".
While if a beggar, I would have to get up off my duff every day and go out and -- at the very least -- have a sign that would ask people for their support. Whether they supported me or not would be their choice. I would not be taking a set amount from them because how much they gave me would be their choice as well. "Beggars can't be choosers" and I could not choose who gave to me -- family, friend, or foe: whoever would, would be welcome.
As a beggar, I would have to use the money I received from the good hearts of my fellow humans until it ran out and I would have to go out and ask for more. This, in its turn, would teach me something about gratefulness, about humility, about shame and pride. It would teach me about being careful with the money strangers gave me and to use it wisely for the things I need; not whatever I wanted. A budget would be imperative and it would be followed to the strictest "nth" degree. Every penny pinched, every dime made a dollar, so that I would not have to face the empty pocket at the end of the week and go out and ask strangers for more.
As a beggar, I would be forced to do what I legally and morally could to entice people to give me some of their money. Whether that be smiling sweetly, looking as pitiful as I can, changing the wording of the sign I used, or washing their car, it would be up to me to get them to agree to give to me. I would have to be creative, resourceful and capable of getting people to agree to give me some of their hard earned cash. This would either allow me to continue begging, or teach me something about entrepreneurship and encourage me to do something besides begging.
As a beggar, my family and friends and total strangers would not be forced to give to me, to support someone they had no say in supporting, and they would not be forced to give whatever dollar amount the federal (or State, County, or City) government took from them via taxes to support me in my government program houses, food, health care, etc. It would be a free choice of compassion and mercy on their part, allowing them to reap the spiritual and emotional benefits. As a beggar, my gratitude may be the only reward they received, but it would be eternal.
As a beggar, finding a safe, comfortable place to sleep would be my job, my desire, nightly. It would be upon my head if I wound up sleeping where I got rained upon, or if I was uncomfortable nightly. This would lead to my trying harder to get enough money to eat and to either find a shelter for homeless people that would have space for me, or to be able to rent a room so that I could sleep in a bed and not on the street.
As a beggar, while it would not be a matter of pride, at least I would not be looking at my neighbor and thinking that there is another program I can sign up for in order to have "X" as they do, or to be able to have "Y" as someone else does. Government programs would not be my failsafe, my "go to" relief: it would be myself on whom I would have to rely and that would be so much better than stealing from all of you.
That's why I think it would be better to be a beggar than to be on welfare, living in government housing, on food stamps, W.I.C. and other food programs, while getting Medicare/Medicaid to get health care and to snarl that I don't have enough. I want more and the government, "We, the People", should -- better! -- provide it. At least, as a beggar, I would be able to look you in the eye and not feel like a thief.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Tea Party Suggestions: Please be proactive
Many of my readers know that I have been what some would call “critical” of the Tea Party movement. While I support their cause wholeheartedly, I have never thought that getting together at a rally where nothing is actually done besides a support system and a lot of “feel good” speeches accomplished anything except emotional support. While emotional support for those who are in the Tea Party may be a good thing in keeping them from feeling alone, it does exclusively that: emotions. Emotions are not actions and that is what I have always thought the Tea Party should be about. After all, if your numbers have Congress and the MSM afraid of you, why waste that fear? Why not put that power into action and do something with it? However, I saw very few Tea Party activities besides rallies and speeches; and neither of those things accomplishes anything. Therefore, in order to encourage Tea Party members in their activities to make a difference, I have the following suggestions for getting active and doing something.
Please take these suggestions in the spirit they are offered: not as a criticism, but as a list of things people may have the time, be willing to make the effort, and have the wherewithal to do without having to do it all themselves, and without having to feel as though they weren’t cut out for one particular item that every Tea Party member is already doing because there are no other ideas put forth. I try to run the gamut of ideas that require differing amounts of effort, money, time, personal nerves and attendance. Not everyone will wish to do every suggestion; not every suggestion will be right for all. Pick one or more that you are comfortable with and do those. As the Bible says, “And he gave some, apostles, and some, prophets, and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ:” (Eph. 4:11-12). No one person is supposed to be everything. Choose which you will do and follow through with all your heart.
The list of possibilities:
GOVERNMENT:
• Start attending Brevard County Board of County Commission meetings and speak against items that would mean the BOCC voting to spend your money. This is a necessary step to help lower taxes at home. Remember, with the manned space program (so far just the manned) shut down, there will be fewer people to pay for the things the BOCC wants to spend money on. There will be fewer homes occupied and there will be fewer people paying property taxes in order to fund those BOCC votes. It’s your money; do something to protect it. There should be no fewer than forty or fifty Tea Party members at each BOCC meeting and at least that many at the Budget meetings.
• If you do not wish to attend BOCC meetings and speak on spending items, then attend smaller meetings: workshops, budget discussions, etc., and speak against the spending items there. Again, the car pool organizers would be vital here. If you do not wish to be involved in the BOCC or budget discussions because you “don’t do numbers”, then do something else in a County Committee or Board. Request that your County Commissioner appoint you to represent your area. If you get to vote on spending items, vote against them. If you do not get to vote on spending, then vote in the most conservative way possible. Boards and Committees are usually stepping stones for those wishing to become political candidates. Being assigned to Boards and Committees means making political connections. Keep your eyes open and find out who is trying to use it as a stepping stone and what their political bent is (progressive or Conservative). Inform the present of the possible future. (If you live in an incorporated city within Brevard County, do the same things as suggested above for the “County” section, but at your City Council meetings. That’s a given.)
• Become a candidate. If you are the right person for the job, you can do so and be elected, especially in today’s climate. I know it’s scary and that there are a lot of requirements and very little time left (if any) to qualify. But if that is what you are being called to do, go for it. Campaigning between now and August primaries is going to be difficult, but you can do it. Look at all of the people who went to the Tea Parties and request their help with getting you into office. If you have been at the Tea Parties, they may recognize you. If not, show them what you’re made of and stand for lower taxes at all times; before the election, and if you win, after the election.
• If you choose not to become a candidate, be sure to vote for the most CONSERVATIVE person on the ballot, no matter what the party designation is behind the candidate’s name. Conservative people are for smaller government and lower taxes, and that’s what the Tea Party is all about. We all know that there are way too many RINOs in the Republican Party nowadays to believe that the “R” party designation means that they won’t vote for higher taxes (think Mary Bolin and Chuck Nelson on the BOCC: both ran as Republicans).
• Contact your local representatives and tell them that you are forming a group of people who would like to meet with him/her on a regular basis to advise them on what the people are thinking. IF they agree to meet with you regularly, excellent! They’re interested in what their constituents think. IF they don’t agree to meet with you, get together with the group of people and talk about what this representative (BOCC member, Senator, whatever) is doing and discuss your reactions to what they are doing. Take notes on what was discussed and send those notes to the representative on a regular basis. This will let the representative know that they are being watched and whether you think they are doing a good job, a terrible job, or just middling.
• Visit your local representatives’ offices individually (just you and/or your family): BOCC, State and U.S. elected officials should become familiar with your face and with your name. This reminds them that their votes have an impact on individuals, not just groups. It makes it more personal when they see that you have a war injury and walk with a cane and that vote is going to affect your veteran’s benefits; or that your little boy has aspirations to be an astronaut and the space program is important to the future, too. Write to them, call them and visit them. Let them know that you are watching them and that you have the vote and you will use it. Don’t stalk them; just let them know that you are watching their every vote.
NEIGHBORHOOD:
• Start “Tuesday Teas” (use whichever title you wish for them) in which you gather a few of your neighbors (5-10) each Tuesday and talk politics and taxes. These do not have to be Tea Party members, just people who need the information. Have facts and figures ready. Have the information available. Get online and be ready to prove your assertions. Have your computer set up in a convenient location for questions to be looked into immediately. “Fingertip knowledge” is very handy in winning people over to the truth.
• Coordinate a bi-annual Block Party for your street and get Tea Party speakers to come speak at your event. This should not be an election event; it should be an educational event. Tea Party speakers should be from a different area than your neighborhood so that people don’t see it as a “get out the vote” event. This will help with participation and ease suspicions. The Tea Party speaker may get some good feedback and people will talk, but they won’t be able to vote for him/her.
• If you can afford the expense, order pamphlets and books from www.wallbuilders.com and other websites to teach the truth of how America was founded and who America is supposed to be. Wallbuilders.com has one particular pamphlet that talks about “Separation of Church and State” and covers that subject thoroughly (did you know that statement was written in a private letter and taken totally out of context?) that sells for 50¢ each. Twenty of those will cost you ten dollars plus shipping. If you have that to spare, order it and loan it to your neighbors and after they read it, discuss it with them. Then ask for it back and ask someone else to read it. Or, just let them keep it but ask them to promise to pass it on.
• If the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, etc., have guest speakers, ask if you can come speak to their members and teach them about the Boston Tea Party for a merit badge event. Teach the members about the tax rebellion during our Founding and relate it to today’s Tea Party and what the governments (city, county, state and federal) are currently doing to us.
• Have a garage sale and have information about the Tea Party and what it stands for and what it is trying to accomplish ready to give to anyone who visits your garage sale. Some will not like it; some will not accept it; some will accept it and drop it on the ground right in front of you. Expect that, but at least you tried. With every purchase, have a plastic bag ready to put the purchases in; include your information on the Tea Party in the bag with purchase.
SCHOOLS:
• Get involved in your child’s or grandchild’s school. Volunteer and watch the way the classes are run; what they teach the children and how they teach the children. If you see that the progressive slant is being favored, make a fuss about it and contact the School Board after speaking to the principal if he/she will not make a change.
• Check your child’s/grandchild’s school text books. If they are teaching “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”, excellent! If they are skewing the information and Ronald W. Reagan gets a short paragraph and Clinton and Obama get a few pages of praise, they’re doing it wrong. Make a fuss at the school and at the School Board about the book being skewed.
• Volunteer to teach a class on the Founding Fathers and what they actually believed and wanted for America. Resources are available on the internet – especially at www.wallbuilders.com , www.askheritage.org -- among others. Teach the children the truth about our Founding Fathers and the fact that they started this nation as a Christian nation.
OTHER:
• Start a phone bank and man it. Be the person who puts together a phone tree and be the person who is the person to contact in case there is an action item, important development, etc., that the Tea Party members need to know about or act upon.
• If you cannot attend BOCC meetings, be the person who organizes car pools and pick-ups for those who wish to attend but have no transportation. This would be a vital service to get the Tea Party voices to the BOCC meetings and keep your taxes down.
• If you are a member of Toast Masters, Kiwanis, Elks, etc., ask to do an informational speech on the Tea Party and on what it is trying to accomplish. Be sure to have facts and figures readily available and proof of any political assertions you may be making printed out.
• Write a blog about what is going on in government, about the waste and spending. Your writing is not like mine and your writing may reach someone that my writing will never touch. This is due to the differences in writing styles. While I hit people on the nose with the truth, some do not like that style, while others respond favorably to it. Your style will be different from mine and your style may reach your neighbor, your friend at church, or whomever that I would never be able to reach. Print “web cards” (like business cards, but with your blog info) and put them everywhere.
• Write letters to the editor about the issues facing us with high taxes, job losses and the impacts it will have on your children or grandchildren (or you). Write not just to Florida Today, but to every printed item in your neighborhood including HOA newsletters, your area freebies (Coffee News, Hometown News, Senior Life, etc.), and any Club newsletters you belong to that may have the slightest possibility of publishing the letter: ‘Tis better to try and fail than never to have tried.
• Something EVERYONE CAN AND SHOULD DO: Get a copy of the U.S. Constitution (even if it’s printed out on your own printer) and carry it with you after you have read it four or five times through. Know the U.S. Constitution. Remember that it protects you more than it does the government.
Please take these suggestions in the spirit they are offered: not as a criticism, but as a list of things people may have the time, be willing to make the effort, and have the wherewithal to do without having to do it all themselves, and without having to feel as though they weren’t cut out for one particular item that every Tea Party member is already doing because there are no other ideas put forth. I try to run the gamut of ideas that require differing amounts of effort, money, time, personal nerves and attendance. Not everyone will wish to do every suggestion; not every suggestion will be right for all. Pick one or more that you are comfortable with and do those. As the Bible says, “And he gave some, apostles, and some, prophets, and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ:” (Eph. 4:11-12). No one person is supposed to be everything. Choose which you will do and follow through with all your heart.
The list of possibilities:
GOVERNMENT:
• Start attending Brevard County Board of County Commission meetings and speak against items that would mean the BOCC voting to spend your money. This is a necessary step to help lower taxes at home. Remember, with the manned space program (so far just the manned) shut down, there will be fewer people to pay for the things the BOCC wants to spend money on. There will be fewer homes occupied and there will be fewer people paying property taxes in order to fund those BOCC votes. It’s your money; do something to protect it. There should be no fewer than forty or fifty Tea Party members at each BOCC meeting and at least that many at the Budget meetings.
• If you do not wish to attend BOCC meetings and speak on spending items, then attend smaller meetings: workshops, budget discussions, etc., and speak against the spending items there. Again, the car pool organizers would be vital here. If you do not wish to be involved in the BOCC or budget discussions because you “don’t do numbers”, then do something else in a County Committee or Board. Request that your County Commissioner appoint you to represent your area. If you get to vote on spending items, vote against them. If you do not get to vote on spending, then vote in the most conservative way possible. Boards and Committees are usually stepping stones for those wishing to become political candidates. Being assigned to Boards and Committees means making political connections. Keep your eyes open and find out who is trying to use it as a stepping stone and what their political bent is (progressive or Conservative). Inform the present of the possible future. (If you live in an incorporated city within Brevard County, do the same things as suggested above for the “County” section, but at your City Council meetings. That’s a given.)
• Become a candidate. If you are the right person for the job, you can do so and be elected, especially in today’s climate. I know it’s scary and that there are a lot of requirements and very little time left (if any) to qualify. But if that is what you are being called to do, go for it. Campaigning between now and August primaries is going to be difficult, but you can do it. Look at all of the people who went to the Tea Parties and request their help with getting you into office. If you have been at the Tea Parties, they may recognize you. If not, show them what you’re made of and stand for lower taxes at all times; before the election, and if you win, after the election.
• If you choose not to become a candidate, be sure to vote for the most CONSERVATIVE person on the ballot, no matter what the party designation is behind the candidate’s name. Conservative people are for smaller government and lower taxes, and that’s what the Tea Party is all about. We all know that there are way too many RINOs in the Republican Party nowadays to believe that the “R” party designation means that they won’t vote for higher taxes (think Mary Bolin and Chuck Nelson on the BOCC: both ran as Republicans).
• Contact your local representatives and tell them that you are forming a group of people who would like to meet with him/her on a regular basis to advise them on what the people are thinking. IF they agree to meet with you regularly, excellent! They’re interested in what their constituents think. IF they don’t agree to meet with you, get together with the group of people and talk about what this representative (BOCC member, Senator, whatever) is doing and discuss your reactions to what they are doing. Take notes on what was discussed and send those notes to the representative on a regular basis. This will let the representative know that they are being watched and whether you think they are doing a good job, a terrible job, or just middling.
• Visit your local representatives’ offices individually (just you and/or your family): BOCC, State and U.S. elected officials should become familiar with your face and with your name. This reminds them that their votes have an impact on individuals, not just groups. It makes it more personal when they see that you have a war injury and walk with a cane and that vote is going to affect your veteran’s benefits; or that your little boy has aspirations to be an astronaut and the space program is important to the future, too. Write to them, call them and visit them. Let them know that you are watching them and that you have the vote and you will use it. Don’t stalk them; just let them know that you are watching their every vote.
NEIGHBORHOOD:
• Start “Tuesday Teas” (use whichever title you wish for them) in which you gather a few of your neighbors (5-10) each Tuesday and talk politics and taxes. These do not have to be Tea Party members, just people who need the information. Have facts and figures ready. Have the information available. Get online and be ready to prove your assertions. Have your computer set up in a convenient location for questions to be looked into immediately. “Fingertip knowledge” is very handy in winning people over to the truth.
• Coordinate a bi-annual Block Party for your street and get Tea Party speakers to come speak at your event. This should not be an election event; it should be an educational event. Tea Party speakers should be from a different area than your neighborhood so that people don’t see it as a “get out the vote” event. This will help with participation and ease suspicions. The Tea Party speaker may get some good feedback and people will talk, but they won’t be able to vote for him/her.
• If you can afford the expense, order pamphlets and books from www.wallbuilders.com and other websites to teach the truth of how America was founded and who America is supposed to be. Wallbuilders.com has one particular pamphlet that talks about “Separation of Church and State” and covers that subject thoroughly (did you know that statement was written in a private letter and taken totally out of context?) that sells for 50¢ each. Twenty of those will cost you ten dollars plus shipping. If you have that to spare, order it and loan it to your neighbors and after they read it, discuss it with them. Then ask for it back and ask someone else to read it. Or, just let them keep it but ask them to promise to pass it on.
• If the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, etc., have guest speakers, ask if you can come speak to their members and teach them about the Boston Tea Party for a merit badge event. Teach the members about the tax rebellion during our Founding and relate it to today’s Tea Party and what the governments (city, county, state and federal) are currently doing to us.
• Have a garage sale and have information about the Tea Party and what it stands for and what it is trying to accomplish ready to give to anyone who visits your garage sale. Some will not like it; some will not accept it; some will accept it and drop it on the ground right in front of you. Expect that, but at least you tried. With every purchase, have a plastic bag ready to put the purchases in; include your information on the Tea Party in the bag with purchase.
SCHOOLS:
• Get involved in your child’s or grandchild’s school. Volunteer and watch the way the classes are run; what they teach the children and how they teach the children. If you see that the progressive slant is being favored, make a fuss about it and contact the School Board after speaking to the principal if he/she will not make a change.
• Check your child’s/grandchild’s school text books. If they are teaching “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”, excellent! If they are skewing the information and Ronald W. Reagan gets a short paragraph and Clinton and Obama get a few pages of praise, they’re doing it wrong. Make a fuss at the school and at the School Board about the book being skewed.
• Volunteer to teach a class on the Founding Fathers and what they actually believed and wanted for America. Resources are available on the internet – especially at www.wallbuilders.com , www.askheritage.org -- among others. Teach the children the truth about our Founding Fathers and the fact that they started this nation as a Christian nation.
OTHER:
• Start a phone bank and man it. Be the person who puts together a phone tree and be the person who is the person to contact in case there is an action item, important development, etc., that the Tea Party members need to know about or act upon.
• If you cannot attend BOCC meetings, be the person who organizes car pools and pick-ups for those who wish to attend but have no transportation. This would be a vital service to get the Tea Party voices to the BOCC meetings and keep your taxes down.
• If you are a member of Toast Masters, Kiwanis, Elks, etc., ask to do an informational speech on the Tea Party and on what it is trying to accomplish. Be sure to have facts and figures readily available and proof of any political assertions you may be making printed out.
• Write a blog about what is going on in government, about the waste and spending. Your writing is not like mine and your writing may reach someone that my writing will never touch. This is due to the differences in writing styles. While I hit people on the nose with the truth, some do not like that style, while others respond favorably to it. Your style will be different from mine and your style may reach your neighbor, your friend at church, or whomever that I would never be able to reach. Print “web cards” (like business cards, but with your blog info) and put them everywhere.
• Write letters to the editor about the issues facing us with high taxes, job losses and the impacts it will have on your children or grandchildren (or you). Write not just to Florida Today, but to every printed item in your neighborhood including HOA newsletters, your area freebies (Coffee News, Hometown News, Senior Life, etc.), and any Club newsletters you belong to that may have the slightest possibility of publishing the letter: ‘Tis better to try and fail than never to have tried.
• Something EVERYONE CAN AND SHOULD DO: Get a copy of the U.S. Constitution (even if it’s printed out on your own printer) and carry it with you after you have read it four or five times through. Know the U.S. Constitution. Remember that it protects you more than it does the government.