Monday, June 30, 2008

Saturday, June 28, 2008


I will concede that superiority by birth is a rarity, by race, creed, color or sexual orientation, is an impossibility. However, superiority does exist genetically. Some people will lack the genetic make up to compete as a boxer, jockey, or a double PhD. In today’s world we are forced to “create” an illusion of a level playing field, it is a fallacy, and a shame.
“In Defense of Elitism As if it requires defending …
Gym Jones is exclusive. We exclude. It is not a question of elitism vs. egalitarianism because there can be no question; the black belt is elite, the white belt is not. The black belt is earned through long, difficult work, rigorous education, commitment, and persistence. Not everyone gets a black belt. It's not T-Ball. We invite elite performers to train here because they foster the environment we prefer. It is the rare athlete who improves despite training exclusively with less capable practitioners and such exceptions may not be used to prove a rule. Talented athletes surround themselves with others of a similar or higher caliber – both mental and physical – and improve by doing so. “

Recognize and embrace how you are different from society, and the rest of the gene pool. The “real” intelligent design is the fact that even twins, separated as zygotes are individual. Take your strengths and tune them to fit your needs, take your weaknesses and adapt to over come. My heroes have always been me and women of abnormal drive and physique. Strive not to become your heroes, but over come them.

Nationalism of facts or fiction?

Americans generally have an appearance of pride nad conviction of our counrty and its citizens. This however cannot be based on the past alone. Is an achievement of your great grand father a reason to salute you? It may provide a path to examine you, but can you stand on your own merits? a MUST READ article.
"After more than two centuries of "constitutionally limited government," the results are clear and incontrovertible. At the outset of the American "experiment," the tax burden imposed on Americans was light, indeed almost negligible. Money consisted of fixed quantities of gold and silver. The definition of private property was clear and seemingly immutable, and the right to self-defense was regarded as sacrosanct. No standing army existed, and, as expressed in George Washington's Farewell Address, a firm commitment to free trade and a noninterventionist foreign policy appeared to be in place. Two hundred years later, matters have changed dramatically."
"how can we ever succeed in implementing such a fundamental constitutional reform?...Essentially, the answer to this question is the same as that given by the American revolutionaries more than two hundred years ago: through the creation of free territories and by means of secession. "
Thanks to despotic policies and institutions of present day politics, it is arguably illegal to openly discuss secession and secession itself has been declared un-constitutional.
Even though there is a clear and present history of it in America.

Join groups, vote, distribute literature, vote, educate children, vote, and change the structure from within. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. Watch the government, they are surely watching YOU.
Semper Vigilans,

Wasted Votes?

The only vote wasted is one that is uncast. That being said, we will end up with a president in 2009 who is anti-gun, tax raising, big gov't spending idealog. McCain and Obama vary only in technique, not goals.
Bob Barr makes John Kerry look like a straight shooter, with a solid foundation. Mr. Barr has some great points and writings, AS OF THIS YEAR! Where was Mr. Barrs stance on guns, taxes, and federalist ideals when he was in power? Hanging with the others of the establishment today.
Mr. Barr is the only one "trying" to hide the similarities, but sadly his past shows he is one of "them."
This election is truly a joke and the saddest of possible options in at least my lifetime. Looking to third parties is a "look" in the right direction, but COMPLETE OVERHAUL is REQUIRED, both by morals and the CONSTITUTION.
Sic vis pacem, para bellum,


Due to recent events and discussions a serious thought has occurred to me, a moral and philosophical dilemma if you will. If a pending revolt were to happen, we, or more specifically I, have some unintended consequences to think about. Today even more than in our first Revolution, or the War Between the States, the battles would be brought "home." Being a single income household I have not my life and livelihood, but that of my family to put first. This is an institution I entered into willingly and freely, I love my wife and children with more than any words written or spoke can say. It was and is a choice I would not change, and in fact cannot see a life without making it. That being the case, here is my dilemma. A revolt that is "open and grand" or one that is "guerilla and quick" presents me with the choice between my commitment to my family, and my commitment to my principles. A fight between any citizens and their government, a "revolution" by definition, would bring the horrors of war to the faces and forefront of my children. Is my vanity in "what's right is right" justification for brining the spoils to my family's life? My wife knows who I am and daily chooses to stay with me, sometimes which alone must be a miracle. But my children, they did not ask nor would they openly share my political or theoretical beliefs. At what point does "father knows best" hit the fan. As a child I questioned my father frequently, this continues to this day, so the aforementioned does not pass the muster. But what of my aspirations, dreams and intimate desire to provide not just my children, but my fellow citizens and their families with the America that is deserved to be.
Do I believe in the Constitution of the United States under "original intent"?
Do I believe in the abolishment of large federal institutions, and a return to "states rights"?
Do I believe that in order for evil (tyranny) to prevail, it only require that good men do nothing?
With all of my heart.
Can one man/woman make a difference?
I believe they can change the world, for better or worse.
At what point can I no longer allow the chains of despotism to close around the necks of my family?
This is the question I put to you, for I have no answer. As an individual this is a simple question, but as a "patriot" you must take the welfare of the community under your advisement. Is it in "their" best interest that "I" feel oppressed? Thomas Jefferson once said "That a man owes no duty to which he is not urged by some impulsive feeling... is correct, if referred to the standard of general feeling in the given case, and not to the feeling of a single individual." -- to Thomas Law, 1814.
In recent times my belief is that individuals can and should govern themselves, without authoritative control, but rather simply guidance through accord within a union, is the only true moral path we should pursue. I ask you, whoever you may be, for guidance. I do not speak to the "Creator" as others claim to. At what point do my principals become those of my families? Should I possibly regret an action, or continually regret inaction? If an individual can stimulate change through non violent measures, am I that man? Am I up to the task? I am aware of the lunacy in asking strangers to judge my self doubt, but it is the only way to judge the message. Ask the question and hopefully be surprised at the answers.
"The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations ... This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution."- John Adams.

Listening to the Constitution

On June 12, 2008 the Supreme Court delivered a ruling on the case of Boumediene vs Bush. Read brief contents here . This decision has quickly been touted as controversial on several grounds. The most of which are people saying that the origins of the suit are "terrorists", "enemy combatants", or not "American citizens." I have more than one issue with the decision. Read here at ...:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
But all of the supposed controversy is not directed correctly. Keep in mind when the initial briefs were filed, some of the Guantanamo detainees had been in custody, without charges, without trial for up to 2 years, which is now 6 years and running. Are some or even all of the detainees "bad people"? That is precisely why I am concerned; NO ONE is answering this question with due process, through the writ of habeas corpus.

The Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
(unalienable, inalienable : incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred. Webeters)
The Constitution of the United States Article 1 Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power…To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

The Bill of Rights: Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Bill of Rights: Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Read the full text of these amazing documents here

I posted these excerpts for a reason, the Declaration of Independence speaks of our "unalienable Rights" that are NOT granted by the government of ANY nation, but by birth itself. People speak of our "constitutional rights", my rights are NOT GRANTED by the Constitution, but by the Creator. The Constitution is a list of what the government CANNOT do, against rights that are natural, not granted. There is no citizenship to any Nation required for Liberty, we only have a set of rules that our representatives must work within so that we can be a leading example to the world, the "shining light" Ronal Reagan spoke of. Even Chief Justice Roberts wrote in his dissent "The important point for me, however, is that the Court should have resolved these cases on other grounds. Habeas is most fundamentally a procedural right, a mechanism for contesting the legality of executive detention. The critical threshold question in these cases, prior to any inquiry about the writ's scope, is whether the system the political branches designed protects whatever rights the detainees may possess. If so, there is no need for any additional process, whether called "habeas" or something else."

The Constitution is not a granting of rights by the government, but a set of rules by the People for the government. "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," (The Declaration of Independence 1776)

Some people also want to claim that this "is a military issue." If that is the case lets look at the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:
(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.
(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.
This chapter applies in all places.
a) Apprehension is the taking of a person into custody.
(a) Charges and specifications shall be signed by a person subject to this chapter under oath before a commissioned officer of the armed forces authorized to administer oaths and shall state--
(1) that the signer has personal knowledge of, or has investigated, the matters set forth therein; and
(2) that they are true in fact to the best of his knowledge and belief.
(b) Upon the preferring of charges, the proper authority shall take immediate steps to determine what disposition should be made thereof in the interest of justice and discipline, and the person accused shall be informed of the charges against him as soon as practicable.
(a) No person subject to this chapter may compel any person to incriminate himself or to answer any questions the answer to which may tend to incriminate him.
(b) No person subject to this chapter may interrogate, or request any statement from an accused or a person suspected of an offense without first informing him of the nature of the accusation and advising him that he does not have to make any statement regarding the offense of which he is accused or suspected and that any statement made by him may be used as evidence against him in a trial by court-martial.
(c) No person subject to this chapter may compel any person to make a statement or produce evidence before any military tribunal if the statement or evidence in not material to the issue and may tend to degrade him.
(d) No statement obtained from any person in violation of this article, or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement may be received in evidence against him in a trial by court-martial.
The trial counsel, the defense counsel, and the court-martial shall have equal opportunity to obtain witnesses and other evidence in accordance with such regulations as the President may prescribe. Process issued in court-martial cases to compel witnesses to appear and testify and to compel the production of other evidence shall be similar to that which courts of the Unites States having criminal jurisdiction may lawfully issue and shall run to any part of the United States, or the Territories, Commonwealths, and possessions.

I am not saying that the "prisoners" are innocent or should be set free. I am NOT criticizing the men and women involved in the actions of their commanders. However I believe is evident in the above we have the tools, text, and historical proof that our rights are not granted nor guaranteed by anyone but ourselves, we must choose to not strip these rights we hold so dear from others. We have the debate and the teachings, now comes the hard part, we need to listen.

Thank you,

Listening to the Constitution

Economic Struggle, What Can Be Done?

Economic Struggle, What Can Be Done?
I have been reading the posts and blogs of a man in Argentina, , he is explaining to others the reality of what happens as a government and society collapses. With out any gain for himself, only the will to help prepare others. His posts have been informative and thought provoking for me. One such post lead me to a YouTube documentary

This video now belongs in my top 5 most influential moments in my life. Please watch all 12 parts. Here is a brief idea as why. I am a grown man with a family and children, fairly successful in business, I am the "average" American. I like many others have problems with my government and its practices, yet speak out only to others I know personally, occasionally writing my representatives. The economic turn in Argentina is eerily similar to America's current financial policies. On December 20, 2001 the people of Argentina rose up and said ENOUGH. In a peaceful protest they affected change of their government. That in and above itself is just another time in history that change has occurred through protest. What makes it amazing, and to be honest brought more than on tear to my eye, was the honor, and commitment that citizens showed without leadership. Independent and free thinking Argentineans came together without a plan, without resources and created a day of infamy. I am embarrassed to have not studied this more in the past.

On our currency it is printed "In God We Trust". Since I do not subscribe to any organized religion I translate that in my mind to "In Mankind I Trust." Seeing the actions of Argentina that day reinforced that belief. Thirty-five patriots died that day, not for religion, money, or power, but for what many take for granted daily. A chance for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. About 20 minutes into this movie I quit thinking "what would I do, how would I react" and had a change in thought process to "what AM I doing, how AM I reacting?" Sadly the answer to both is not enough. This is my first step to avoid the documentary America: Now or Never

I do not have a lot of people to "network" this video or post to. After watching it please pass on this inspirational video to as many as possible.
Viva la Revolucion! Dios bendice Argentina!
Thank You,

Revolution polluting the airwaves?

I was reading some blogs and postings and noticed a general decline in the attitude of what I will call, people for change. (real change, not the socialist/fascist manifestos of politics today) People who see me a lot or know me well, will roll their eyes at my "power of positive thinking" rhetoric. You will have a hard time convincing people to change by telling them life (theirs or yours) sucks; they already have an opinion about that. Sell them on the "positives" of your new message. If all else fails read the "Federalist Papers" again, arm yourself with knowledge, and give them hope. Idealists change the world, for better or worse. The general population flows with the tide.
Remember your history, not the one printed in High School books; the American Revolution was not brought on by "popular vote." The founders as we call them today were an assembly of small groups, consisting of some VERY intelligent and convincing men. They told of a powerful message, "liberty and rights." Liberty being your choices, and rights being UNDENIABLE by other peoples choices. That message is being heard again today, I thank Ron Paul for bringing it to the forefront of "mass-media" again. Our country has been in a downward trend for generations, since well before I was born, and needs to be rebuilt to what it was. Unfortunately, change can only come after tragedy, rebuild after destruction. Let us hope the tragedy is small and the change is large. Keep positive, keep informed and spread the words of our founders. Focus on the ability to reach total strangers across the globe in an instant, make your message heard. America can be the "Shining light on the hill" again. It will not come quickly or easily.