India is said to be one of the great economic success stories of modern times: an emerging power and the world's biggest democracy.

But the Booker Prize-winning author and anti-globalisation activist Arundhati Roy tells a different story.

Speaking to the BBC's Newsnight, she says tens of thousands of the country's poorest people are suffering at the hands of corrupt governments bought and sold by big corporations. Please view the video:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13624077

Somalia was a pastoral economy based on "exchange" between nomadic herdsmen and small agriculturalists. Nomadic pastoralists accounted for 50 percent of the population. In the 1970s, resettlement programs led to the development of a sizeable sector of commercial pastoralism. Livestock contributed to 80 percent of export earnings until 1983. Despite recurrent droughts, Somalia remained virtually self-sufficient in food until the 1970s.

The IMF-World Bank intervention in the early 1980s contributed to exacerbating the crisis of Somali agriculture. The economic reforms undermined the fragile exchange relationship between the "nomadic economy" and the "sedentary economy" - i.e. between pastoralists and small farmers characterized by money transactions as well as traditional barter. A very tight austerity program was imposed on the government largely to release the funds required to service Somalia's debt with the Paris Club. In fact, a large share of the external debt was held by the Washington-based financial institutions.' According to an ILO mission report:

[T]he Fund alone among Somalia's major recipients of debt service payments, refuses to reschedule. (...) De facto it is helping to finance an adjustment program, one of whose major goals is to repay the IMF itself. Read article:

'East Africa has two post-colonial traditions of citizenship', writes Mahmood Mamdani: territorial and ethnic. If the region is to have a political federation, it will need to be based on a common citizenship, he argues: 'Which one will it be?'

I had not paid much attention about the debt ceiling until the story broke that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) had to remove himself from debt ceiling negotiation talks due to his short bet against the U.S. dollar.  I first heard about this on Free Speech TV's "The Thom Hartmann Show" over a week ago and since that time, very few people are comprehending the gravity of this situation.  A CONGRESSMAN IS BETTING AGAINST HIS OWN COUNTRY'S CURRENCY AND ECONOMY!!!  Representative Cantor's bet is tantamount to treason and you can best believe that he is the NOT the only congress member betting against America.

Just a few weeks ago, Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY) was forced by his own party to resign over him sending pictures of his penis to an online acquaintance.  Though he made the fatal mistake of lying about the incident to every news outlet that put a microphone in front of him, the offense had NOTHING to do with his job performance nor did the incident take place during work hours as far as we know.  Yet, this story proliferated every news broadcast for 3 weeks.  Now, we have this bombshell about a congressman in a key leadership position who has broken his sworn oath of office and is actively betting against U.S. currency but NO ONE is calling for Eric Cantor's resignation or indictment!  How could this be?    Well,  the debt ceiling talks is the  latest act in the kabuki theater of American politics and we citizens continue on as a helpless, clueless audience seemingly paralyzed to say or do anything about the unfolding drama happening before our very eyes.

Perhaps a lot of us don't understand the whole concept of our national debt and debt ceiling talks, so let me make it plain for you. The U.S. total debt is currently over $54 trillion and the interest on that debt is well over $3 trillion (source:  U.S. National Debt Clock website).  Currently, the U.S. has a $14.294 trillion credit limit which was raised from the previous $12.394 trillion credit limit back in February 2010 (source:  Treasury Direct website).  Our country is $100 billion away from reaching the new credit limit and we only have a little over $3 trillion in tax and state revenue coming in which will only cover our interest payment.  The gross domestic product or total market value of final goods and services produced in our country which serves as our collateral for obtaining loans is currently at $14.7 trillion.  Looking at this from a personal finance perspective, our country is a horrible credit risk (even though Moody's Investors Service gives the US a AAA credit rating just like they gave all the toxic assets that led to the 2008 financial crisis) and would be extremely hard-pressed to get a loan.  However, congress and the president have the exclusive privilege of raising the country's credit limit infinitely despite our inability to pay off the ever-increasing debt.  Once the new credit limit is agreed upon, our government goes about the business of selling treasury bonds (debt) to individuals, corporations and other countries such as China, Japan, and Russia.  Our country also sells large amounts of its debt to other countries that export oil (Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria) and serve as banking centers (Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles, Panama and the British Virgin Islands).  The countries that are designated in bold happen to be places that are in conflict either with the U.S. or internally.  Who in their right mind borrows money from their alleged enemies?

Why is it that Republicans are giving President Obama such a hard time  about raising the debt ceiling when it could mean that America defaults on its loans?  I am only calling out the republican party because other than Representative Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Democrats have done little to fire up bi-partisan working class support for increasing taxes on the wealthy.  Most economists and many business leaders believe that an inability to raise the debt ceiling would have damaging and potentially catastrophic economic consequences.  Certainly, an already vulnerable American public would suffer, with increased interest rates, delays in payment for military personnel and the elderly, as well as a suspension of a variety of other vital services.  Since our nation is currently occupying/fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya, there also is a serious risk to our nation's troops overseas and to our strategic international interests. The evidence is strong that our nation would suffer immediate and irreparable harm if the debt ceiling is not raised.  President Obama could issue an emergency executive order to suspend the debt limit since the criteria has been met to do so but what does this mean for our country's escalating debt?  It means that we will continue to wallow in this debt until the countries we owe money call it in and herein lies the farce all of this foolishness.

The world operates on a fiat currency system meaning that the top currencies such as the U.S. dollar, European euro, the Japanese yuan and British pound have no intrinsic value, i.e. they are not based on any physical commodity, but their worth depends on people's faith in them. If people lose faith in a fiat currency, it will stop holding any value and will become no more precious than the paper it was printed on.  Seeing as the House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has a bet against the dollar, it would appear that one of the very people who is paid and entrusted with "bearing true faith and allegiance" to his country, has forsaken it.  The deafening silence about this traitorous act leads me believe that the rest of congress is in on the same bet.  Sadly enough, average citizens are the ones who have to shoulder the overwhelming burden of endless debt.  Yet, when it comes time to print up our "funny money"  or borrow it from other countries, that same congress always votes to give the majority of it to banks, corporations and wealthy individuals via bailouts, tax breaks and subsidies aka corporate welfare.  President Obama has proposed $4 trillion in deficit spending cuts (nobody seems to give a damn about the $54+ trillion principal) that come from social safety programs such as Social Security and Medicare.  The diabolical formula is to gradually raise the full eligibility age to 70 for workers born in 1973 and thereafter, that would cut Social Security outlays by 12 percent by 2050, which would equate to massive savings in dollar terms.  But, as the Congressional Budget Office has noted, an increase in the eligibility age is, in effect, a cut in the benefits which people are expecting to get.  “Forcing people with lower-than-average life expectancies to delay claiming benefits would reduce their lifetime benefits.” CBO said in a report last March. “For example, someone who died at 68 would collect benefits for four years rather than six. And because people with lower earnings tend to have shorter life expectancies, they would be more likely to be harmed by the change.” Source:  Reducing the Deficit:  Spending and Revenue Options - CBO March 2011

It would seem that the people who are supposed to be working toward our best interests would rather see us die than to force their obscenely rich friends to pay up on a little income tax.  Instead, they keep citizens at each others' throats with nonsense such as democrat vs. republican, left vs. right, conservative vs. liberal, gay vs. straight, red state vs. blue state, etc.   Meanwhile, the entities who have bought our leadership lock, stock and barrel, laugh at how ignorant, apathetic and self-defeating the only people who can put an end to the suffering, oppression, poverty and war that they inflict upon us.  Though President Obama has backtracked on many things he said on the campaign trail, one thing is true -- he can't do this alone.  Everybody needs to get involved in how this country is being run.  Step #1 - Get educated on what's ACTUALLY happening and how the world has been working without the input of everyday people like you and I.   The executive, legislative and judicial branches of our government are being paid by corporations and banks to screw over the very people who pay their base salary and benefits.

Our government has already legalized torture, wiretapping, occupation of sovereign nations, bribery and discrimination via the Patriot Act, foreign policy and the Citizens United decision.  How long is it going to take us to do something about any of the myriad problems we face before we find ourselves unable to do so?  Time is ticking very fast.  I hope that Republicans are not "playing chicken" with our economy and that the debt ceiling will be raised before we go into default.   But until then, Security Exchange Commission, Department of Justice, Congressional Ethics Committee, get your damn hands out of the cookie jar and start investigating, indicting and sentencing U.S. elected officials who are betting against America!!!!

'Erstwhile colonies of the world unite!' sounds a loud call. Nevertheless, the loudness of the call does not undermine its relevance and legitimacy. The politics of colonization has been such that countries that had been close historically and culturally in the past, have now been distanced. Countries that would have been natural friends have become enemies. For example, Thailand, Mammyar and Singapore are very near to Indian culture and ethos. But the significant part of their trade and bilateral dealing are with Europe. The fact that our colonizers were the same people and they exploited and ransacked our different lands should actually kindle sympathy. Ironically, it is not so. 

http://www1.carleton.ca/africanstudies/multimedia-ias-videos-audio-and-pictures/the-legacy-of-julius-nyerere/

The folowing lengthy video is an important discourse of the challenges facing Africa. Panelist(s) Firoze Manji defines the challenges and addresses grassroot issues and consequences currently being faced. I urge those of you interested in Africa and African studies to view the video -- it is of great importance.

May 25, 2011 discussion with Firoze Manji and Molly Kane of Pambazuka News and Pius Adesanmi of Carleton University: “African Awakenings and New Visions of Solidarity” to celebrate Africa Liberation Day.  Video-taping by Wangui Kimari (Carleton).

Unfortunately it the latter. Americans would rather allow the government to destroy their present and the children's future than to get up off the couch and do something about what is happening in today's world. I sit and think of what I have written and it may not be what you believe but at least it something being said. Instead you sit like cowards and hide from the powers to be (the government) . The Tea Party is attacking the working men and women and you still sit there .The gas prices are going out of reach of the common person and you allow the government to say we are looking for a safe way to drill. Well we have been drill safely on land in this country for over a hundred years so when do we stop sitting on the side lines.

I know I cannot get you to say or do anything about what is happening. American remind me of the abused wife syndrome where they just so use to getting beat down they think this is normal. Then you have the idiot who thinks this is a racial issue again I say idiot . The problems of the government go way beyond this administration and no offense to anybody but Obama has not done anything either way .The people he surround himself with have been the problem not him. I still believe that he means well he is just no a politician and will never be an effect in the government as is due to all the corruption on both sides . Dem and Rep need to be charge with theft in office Congressman and the Senator put this country into dept not the people and the people taxes have been spend without our permission that is theft.

So I say this please stop being cowards and come out and fight for something .Hell anything just try and prove your actual alive. Maybe some day you'll become a True American once again. Otherwise you get what you deserve a life of paying for the mistake of a government who cares nothing for you.

The Author

Most importantly we are human beings who care about one another and are willing to share and lift each other up - we are proud of ourselves and what we have accomplished as a species not just a nation.

We are not democrats or republicans - we are humans and we are all free!

We each care about all humans on earth - the children of the world as well as our own.

We are not selfish and those we have elected to lead us or who have taken power do not represent our values as individuals.

WE humans are not greedy corporations or ambitious politicians -we are not polluters and opportunists -we are not war mongers nor nation builders.

Each human is individually much better than that.

So I ask those who live in America - what are you - democrats - republicans or humans?

All humans are workers with the exception of those who control the economics of humanity.

Slaver takes many forms - it is not restricted to white's or blacks. Women, children and men are all slaves to a society that worships money.

In America politicians and lobbyists and corporations define what we are ....

It is time to end the tyranny of lies and propaganda that supress our will to live and succeed and be happy.

It is time to recognize the truth.

Those whom we have elected to represent us have become our rulers!

I have been growing increasingly frustrated as of late and ranted a bit for venting purposes. After I reread it, I thought I'd post it and see what kind of reception it acquired. Mind you, this is really just a projection of my thoughts.

To sit and say our government has failed us is to idly condone what perpetually transpires. What law has given us, in the American sense, is the protection of sovereignty, both over ourselves and our communities, and the right to exercise rebellion when that sovereignty is greatly trespassed upon. What some may say is treason others will view as necessary, comparable to the axiom of one man's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter, and the venture of guessing has transformed into a small step when we consider whether or not we the people are duly being served. I adjure now that we are not being duly served; we are being servilely dueled.

The dilemma of our nation, above other nations, is the disparity of our citizenry. That my discernible necessity is your overt treason is as hotly contested between the Western and Eastern shores as is any other issue in any other region of the globe. The wedge being the profiteering of this disparity that hastens our decline into dissension and fractured nations, not in the contiguous landmass sense; no, more in the sense of our ideals being presented as wholly irreconcilable. Our religions, politics, morals, social consciousnesses, responsibilities, pay classes and industries are used as a tool to divide us and a powerful tool it is; strong enough in its wedging that it splinters the collective, uniformed truth that the most important thing remains freedom in and of itself -- the very thing that breathed life into this nation -- that the ideal of our nation is the disparity of our citizenry. To use this positive disparity negatively is to take the very breath from our Nation's lungs.

I curiously jest that our politicians have learned this and that our prosperity has so been our downfall in that we have forgotten what it is to struggle together, to fight together to maintain that one undissolvable truth -- that freedom remains our highest ideal, regardless. Where I suggest that politicians have long known of the power of division, we Americans were buoyed and protected for a half-century more by the fourth, inherent branch of Americanism -- the media. However, the media too has now found prosperity and the corruptive nature of power has mutated a once pristine institution into an ugly and dirtied temple of mud-slinging, yellow journalism and divisive language. Fact has been replaced by hate speech and fear mongering on both sides of the media spectrum and the truest casualty of honest journalism has been the unifying power of freedom, and therefore a united American people.

We have lost our protection against the carnivorous hounds of government, the media themselves becoming a Cerberus of carnage feasting on the wounds of the tattered and split American hide. And I wonder now, with politician and media acting as pack predators, what hope is there for the citizenry? We are like rabbits chased by the pack.

I sit idly by and so I understand that so do others, but my wits have grown restless and I wonder if yours do to. Our sovereignty, in the least as a free people, is being greatly trespassed upon and I only wish I knew the right way to exercise a proper rebellion, because we're due. I sit and think long and hard each night how we can improve our situation, how we can incite what needs to catch fire, and in those moments... in those darkest hours I am distracted by the clock as it ticks away, stealing the time we have to make a change, closing the window for our needed revolution, taking the hours that we give it to take by the idle sitting and thinking and talking...

None are to blame for this more than me. Me, and the others who know that burning the forest floor spurs new life, but can't find a way to start the fire. Should I ever find a spark, I shall not hesitate. This is my pledge to the ideal and the cause, this is my pledge to my land and my countrymen: should I ever find a spark, I shall not hesitate. For America, and all that she's capable of being.

This diary entry came about as I pondered why more people are not protesting against the neo-colonial occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. There is a pattern of lying that I thought regular citizens could easily see through in this day and age but our government brainwashing apparently runs much deeper.

So in all your infinite wisdom, you are debating on whether or not you should cut off my unemployment benefits. Maybe I have been too lazy to get out there and find a job, maybe I have been sitting on my ass all year, watching soap operas and eating ice cream, and since there is such a surplus of jobs out there, and since companies are not taking advantage of our economy to have employees do more for less, it certainly looks like it is my fault that I have not looked hard enough. Besides the amount I get from the federal extension, plus the extra money from the stimulus is so great that I am living large at the moment. Oh hell let's cut the crap, I only looked for work once and I was not going to take it anyways, but all you want to do is pass on your misspending and extravagant spending to the people. well if you choose to take the fortune you give me every two weeks, and sometimes late, then don't expect me to ever pay you taxes again.

In the time since I have been on unemployment I have been more busy and active, from being at your doorstep and witnessing the marvelous streets you get to walk every day to spending countless hour helping out the charter school my daughter attends, to from time to time helping out organization that is trying to do some good social work, well helping their director streamline their services to have lower costs and better service, to attending fundraiser, next to council members, and yes sometimes, i don't want to go out the house, because I am so frustrated and angry, but I get up and go out anyways. All this would not have happened if i was still working and you supporting by sorry ass. You are right, I need to get back to work so that you can start taking money from me again.

I might just start my own business and look for ways to help others, hell by that time i might not have to, since you have it all under control, there should be no one to help in about a year. Yeah, watch your seats because "the people" are coming and they want actions, not words, they want progress and not steps backwards. Be them red, blue, green, or other colors, they want you to do the job you swore to do!

My views and practices have changed on spanking over the 23 years I have been a father.

Growing up I experienced and witnessed 3 types of physical discipline.

The 1st we can call the Terror Type. This was my drunk mother's way of dealing with children. She would pick up this massive ash-tray she hovered over while she consumed vodka, and threaten to split my head open with it. She never did, but I was never certain what kind of new hell she was capable of that particular day. She was also habitual about swearing she was about to throw us down the stairs to the basement....again still here....but it scared the hell out of me for along time.

The next type was what I to this day considered basically Appropriate. I got the message quick at the private school I attended around 5th grade. That boat paddle over the principals desk really had a practical purpose. Never did that again! Then there was my grandfather. A very religious, hard working and charitable man. He never tried very hard to fill in for the father who was in prison, but the memories are good. One afternoon I was riding my tricycle on the sidewalk along side the garage. I was probably about 5 or 6. He had just planted some vegtables near the edge of the sidewalk. He said "don't ride off the sidewalk, be careful of the plants", I heard. "Ride straight through that row of veggies", he reached down and gave me one whack to my ass. I was certainly ashamed of myself, but I have no memory of physical pain at all. When I looked up he was wiping away a tear. I never intentionally wanted to cause him to be sad again, and didn't until I became an adult. Grandma never physically disciplined me that I remember. She used guilt to the max. She did go after my sister a couple of times with a dried willow branch....that was pretty borderline stuff.

The last is Criminal. My 3rd stepfather got off on getting drunk and beating the hell out of me. Kicking me around the outside of the house, broken ribs, more black eyes than I can remember...why? I looked him in the eye when he was yelling at me, because he told me to, but he didn't like the look in my eye. I went back to shoot the bastard in my 20's drunk one day. New owners at his house, he had died from an aggressive, painful cancer....Prison would have sucked!

The problem is the state, charged with protecting kids from intentional abuse has lumped all physical discipline into one bag. It would treat my grandfather and my stepfather the same.

Parents are now becoming unwilling to disciple their own children appropriately for fear they will be thrown into a foster care system that has less to do with reunifying families than it is a warehouse for children.

We have become a society that is so impressed with a well behaved, respectful and charitable kid, they are friggin front-page news. If our public school's put the paddle back over the desk & parents corrected their children with love and firmness without Dr. Spock, The Government & Dr. Phil peering over the back fence, we just might be able to live in a society again, that with all it's diversity, practiced more respect for our fellow humans. We could actually get the Criminal Justice budget under control in a generation or so.

Just My Opinion...

Maddad

...we have many sides we're all American.

...many dreams are made but many more are broke.

...one voice may not be heard but many can roar.

...no one can do the job alone and bipartisanship is important.

...money cannot win you a seat in Congress.

...referendums rarely have the effect we want them to.

...every campaign begins with a dream.

...every elected official hopes to help the people.

...words have meaning but can be left empty.

...beware of "the people have spoken."

...there is always a next election.

...it could bne much worse.

...if you don't like it, then you can run for office.

...voting is a right that every citizen must excersice.

...no matter what side, party, sex, beliefs, every official will have more sleepless nights than we can imagine.

...we are a country of all for all.

...campaign money can have so many better uses.

...a minority percentage elects our leaders.

...we all have a voice..

...change is only a few years away.

Remember that many will say what you want to hear, and as soon as they get to their office they forget what they said, keep reminding them what they said and if need be find a better candidate. We should not elect along party lines, but rather on character, and just because someone has done something bad in their past, it does not mean they cannot do the job.

This election was not as a runaway as many thought, but it does say something of what the people want, but what does a change every two years say about as a people?

Today I came across an interesting map while using my Mint.com account. This map gave me a glimpse of the United States that I haven't really seen on any news program (probably because it is so depressing, but maybe C-span did it?). I am sure that this isn't really news and that is why I haven't labeled it as such. I would have you take a look and find your county and see where it stands in comparison to the rest of the country. Is it what you expected? Mine sounds worse from tv ads then what it actually is, which surprised me. Just a remark about the map itself. It would have been helpful to have a total # of counties per state in each category and a total # of counties in each category for the United States as a whole. However I would like to take that a step further if we put our country's totals along some of the other nations of the world, how do we fair? I'm sure if I Googled enough and spent enough hours I could come up with such a thing but then what would I do? Would it make a difference to anyone? Would it make me an advocate against poverty more then what I am already? I have been told that nature abhors a vacuum. the vacuum I'm talking about is vision. If people could (know) and see what they want to do and are encouraged to aspire to do it( not all have that clear map and desire). If Government's would not encumber these peoples visions (through all the possible ways that it does, no specifics at this time) If every area on this map had 3 (or more) job opportunities for a decent wage per person seeking, in each area and these jobs were the kind of work that would make the person feel fulfilled (based on their own personal desires) then I think we could see our nation's GDP (Gross Domestic Product) would explode beyond anything that was ever predicted.

I know I use a lot of IF's but If's are used in planning a project (how much will it cost if we do this?), in programming they are conditionals (If this then that) , in dreams and visions they are weights (If only I get to this place...,If he asks me...., If the bank...). I know that my talking about 3 or more job opportunities is pie in the sky right now but it is not impossible. All it takes is those that have been given the clear vision on things to create for a business dream (a farm, a ranch, a sandwich shop, a builder...etc.) be able to do it with the least amount of 'stop progress' , 'stop the idea' as possible. Those organizations that stop peoples dreams have no care nor concern for the loss involved (does the spotted owl ring a bell, whats been the dream cost loss for this?) and the loss goes beyond just the originator's dream it can be other peoples dreams that are waiting for this particular time and originators idea to come forth.

I believe that without a vision the people parish and having so many things being created by our Government and other groups that are actually causing the people to lose their visions and then fall into poverty.

After carefully looking at the map, I have come to the conclusion that I should probably move to Wyoming, but having not overlayed this map with a map of Government land holdings yet, I will hold off until I can understand what is the real truth that I see in Wyoming.

<embed width="950" height="650" src="http://www.mint.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Mint_Poverty.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"/><a href="http://www.mint.com/">Budget Planner - Mint.com</a>

A long time ago on a small island nation in the Caribbean I was having dinner with the head of the national bank. We were having an interesting conversation about the demographics of his country - "brain drain" - something states like Pennsylvania experience -whereby students leave the state for greener pastures - only in this case they leave the country. Canad and the UK being primary targets for careers.

The nation was impoverished but had a 98% literacy rate - marriage was not an institution yet parenting was - the women were heads of household and light industrial jobs went to them - men found it difficult to find work - the days of sugar cane were long past and tourism was a mainstay of the island country.

Anyway - back to dinner - the subject of poverty came up - on the surface the island citizens appeared to be extremely poor - yet that was more a cosmetic problem than a real problem. Though wages were low - so too was the cost of living. You could drive the circumfirance of the island in approximately four hours on a Sunday morning and be greeted by the sound of churches in little villages - village after village the loud booming voices of the pastor or a choir singing gospel hymns.

This is all background for the subject of this article - television. The island had a central satellite system in place that provided an ample amount of boob tube fodder for tourists and as a by product for those on the island who could afford cable.

My friend voiced a growing concern he had about the impact of television on the nations society as a whole. Most were not wanting and though living in typical Caribbean huts that suggested poverty - the nation was getting by as a whole and of course as I stated earlier the children above all were happy, healthy, educated and well taken care of -

Television my friend said brought dissatisfaction and want for those things that were unnecessary and in the case of most island citizens unaffordable. More and more of the populace at large were spending their meager incomes on cable television. The knife was therefore double-edged. Fishing and tending to crops and livestock or television.

As I said the island was poor by American standards but not impoverished - as is always the case in a society, there were a few who took advantage of the many. The open air market place on a Saturday morning was filled with colorful and noisy activity and produce - fish, vegetables, fruit - and dry goods as well.

Television as a weapon of mass destruction? Think about it's impact on our well off society - is there ever no want? Is there ever no subject of entertainment -regardless of how horrible the circumstances? Is politics fact or fiction? Is the television big brother, sister, mother and father all combined into one?

Can Americans decide what is right or wrong or who to vote for without television? And most of all does television destroy our minds -reorder our priorities as human beings and dumb down it's viewers?

I thin the answers to these questions and more are obvious?

What do you think.

U.S. companies added 64,000 jobs during the month, lower than the projected increase of 75,000. Estimates of economists polled by TheStreet ranged from 60,000 to 100,000.

The government shed 159,000 jobs, reflecting the loss of temporary jobs related to the census and job losses in local government. Economists were expecting more job losses at the local government level as state governments battle heavy deficits and cut education costs.

Since Jan 2009 when the country was losing 787,000 jobs a month, we have now come to ten straight months of private sector growth. But over that span the size of government has actually shrunk. Every month for the past few months, total job numbers have been slightly negative - because of the loss of government jobs (and the overall reduction of goverment at the combined federal, state and local levels).

Meanwhile, majority in the country continues to believe that big government is the problem with our eeconomy. Reduce the size of government and growth will return is the belief contrary to the reality of our shrinking government.

WHAAHAH WHAAAAAAA, TAXES hurt me boo hoooo, I Hate them alll!!!!!!! I WANNA BE FREEEEE from TAXES!

Boy I am just so damn sick of hearing that word thrown around the political school yard like it was Osama Bin Ladins doppleganger. And not only do we play with the word, the politicians play with it and have a special relationship with it, they get to make tax policy.

The Tax code has changed a lot over the years, it has added to the treasury and the nation as a whole. It has helped make us strong and collectively we have all grown because of it.

It is now tweaked here and pinched here and there and is never further than where is was 8 to 12 years ago. Ahhh, but start to play tax code games and then you gotta play with a lot of words and a lot of fudging and hemming and hawwing and you get a little frustrated, don't you? The devil is in the details, those who do or have to do a lot of tax paper work can tell you nightmares and daymares about the code, that ain't no lie. Artists have a real time playing with it, the self employed, bosses, business owners, house owners and guest workers all have to play with different codes and decipher them by themselves.

"Help me Mr. Morse, waht does this dash mean, who put that dot there, oh god I just want to sleep".

Now,we got to have TAXES, we need to pay for things, research things, spy on things, preserve things, help those who don't have things and support those who do have things and even sometimes destroy things. We gotta' lot of things on our list so TAXES are required!

What is not required is a convoluted tome of bibilical proportion to raise taxes. Ande we could really create a tax code that helps small investors and famliy farms and American business owners that are not coprorate big wigs.

So, tax me with your ideas, not your anger at taxes, hell I can do that just as well and I hate hearin' myself so, ideas only.

This, The Greatest Nation on Earth is plagued with trillions of dollars in debt. Unemployment is in the double digits in many places across this land. And we keep getting the cockeyed smile and how the "economic ship" is turning around.

I don't care one bit who you place the blame on, the fact is nothing that has been done thus far has had any affect on the condition of the people.

I am no economist, nor do I have any delusions that I am the smartest guy in the room, but come on! If I could just over-write my bank account at will and have no real plan to pay it back, and no one seamed to care, I could take European vacations to. I am so sick of going to the "discount" grocery store to find items that a year ago were $1.99 are now $2.99. I even remember a time when gas money could be figured in as "other" expenses. Now I have to figure it with the electric bill.

Some genius that is not tied up in the "Fox News is the Devil" or "President Obama is a Muslim" bull, must have an idea how to solve this mess our elected officials till now, have got us in.

Some things seem fairly simple, to a simple guy like me.

1. Stop spending money you don't have.

2. Stop expecting the people finding it impossible to get by in this economic perfect storm to bail you out immediately with taxes. How does making the producers lives harder going to improve the situation as a whole?

3. We need to go back to being a nation of givers and not takers economically. I am not talking about those who are legitimately disabled, or the elderly. But give me a break, they are handing out Social Security Disability to people with fatigue! Join the world, we are all tired and some of us are getting real tired of the political football these bastards are playing with our financial lives.

4. Stop the moronic repetitive, replecation of services. Fire incompetent, apathetic dead wood. Smaller government couldn't hurt for a bit.

Well, although it didn't start out that way I guess this became a rant. Label me what you want but the moderates and those who prize their freedom will make the decisions in the upcoming elections.

We need change alright and it should start with performance pay only for elected officials including the President & Congress.

JMO

Maddad

The big secret is that America is held captive. She can't rescue any other country because She is held captive too. They are holding the most dangerous weapon of all on Her. No, it's not the atomic bomb, and It's not germ warfare, it's Money! But, can She rescue herself? Who, are Her enemies? Why are they Her enemies and how do they work, is the secret. How to free Her is the biggest secret. It can only be done by the wishes of the people, only they can thwart the tyrant's secret acts. But, for now the People are asking those dictators for money and direction. Passively they dedicate money to those tyrants to spend it for them with taxes. The desires of these dictators is to bring the greatest country to its knees and put Her on welfare as all the slaves in communist countries are.

"The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation. At the head is a small group of banking houses... This little coterie...run our government for their own selfish ends. It operates under cover of a self-created screen...seizes...our executive officers...legislative bodies...schools...courts...newspapers and every agency created for the public protection."
N.Y. Mayor, John Hylan.

In spite of the the Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Katrina attacks it seems the people are lulled back to sleep. They are pacified into thinking that those predictors are gone with a new presidency but they are only hid into their many government facilities. Those predictors are laughing and wallowing deep in the money they robbed our country of, from earmarks, Stoical Security, and welfare programs, Enron, and other scams.

The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.." - President Franklin D. Roosevelt, November 21, 1933.

The people are crying out, let's take our country back! But, From whom? And to where are we taking it back to? The people are wondering what are the politicians going to do to us next? Where can we turn to for protection? Or who's policing the police? . But what can be done? Some Senators are saying, let's change our country to another country. But, not telling us, that that country isn't working so well either. Or, let's take our country back to another era in time, like the 60's or the 20's. But those times, brought on depressions. The wall being built around us is scary too. We tore it down at Berlin, and now building it up around us. How can that keep the illegal aliens that's already here, out? Or will it hold us in? Can we blame it on the American system, or is blaming it, the predictor's counter attack? Their blame darts clear back to the dead, our Founding Fathers, that created our American system. They can't defend themselves but, history can. We can judge them by their fruits.

Luke 6;43-45; For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit,

for every tree is known by his own fruit , for of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes, a good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil; for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

"We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world - no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." - Woodrow Wilson.

Although through their secret acts bankers have been controlling our country for four decades, we don't have to be held captive by them any longer. It once drug our country down through a depression for 13 years. When they found our that it was communism that caused it they were able to come out of it. Then like in any disaster the people showed their compassion and helped each other out which brought them out of it.

And, by the 1950's a man worked only eight hours a day and five days a week, to make a living. An average income could afford him a house, car. clothes and have fun grocery shopping, and a thrifty housewife could save his money for medical expenses vacations or college for their children. Wages rose and cost of living went down and working hours were shorter. Sound great? It was, and could be again. Being free is the key word. Yes, this is the USA and we are free but not free enough to work only forty hours a week to make a living. How did he do it ? He stopped depending on the government. He did it his way. With knowledge he had the abilities to figure it out as best he could. .And he did.

1. He studied history clear back to Adam and Eve. - For direction.

2. He studied his delegates and voted. -For peace.

3. He didn't hire illegals. - They cost too much.

4. Lived within his means- for security.

5. He stopped using credit - from experience

6. Understood the constitution - to keep his rights.

7. His wife stayed at home. - To save.

8. He lived the Golden Rule. - To trust.

We can do that and without an act of Congress! It prospered our country then, and the government had no control over those personal decisions. Ours is a fortunate country. We are as free as we make ourselves to be. We don't have to do anything to be free, our founding fathers has done it for us. The constitution protects it. Our greatest weapon to fight with, to keep that freedom, is to obtain a knowledge, of our constitution and history and the morals to apply it. We'll then know what system works what system doesn't work and why. Perhaps we need to learn how to be free.

John 8:32. know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

Ecc. 7: 12.For wisdom is a defence, and money is a defence: but the excellency of knowledge is, that wisdom giveth life to them that have it.

7 The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.

Florida is one of the states participating in this years, "Back To School, Tax Free Day." This program as sold to the citizens was to aid families in shopping for school items and new cloths for the kids to return to their educations. Thank All That Is Good! Summer is OVER!...sorry parental rant ended......

I have heard now this morning, from 2 different local news outlets, what is and is not covered as "tax free". Women's Lingerie? Covered and free of all taxes! Adult Diapers? Absolutely!.....Computers? NO! Copy Paper? Why would that be on there?

Now, I am all for women wearing lingerie, always have been. But unless you have a college kid working her way through college in a "Lingerie Modeling Shop", then I have to assume a new laptop or some paper for the printer would be helpful. I understand that folks that need adult diapers would like a tax break too, however unless our teachers are complaining of incontinence in the classroom, I would rather introduce my lazy children to audio books, but that isn't on the list either.

Of course I could be wrong? But not about the facts.

Just My opinion,

Maddad

The flat out truth is that most peop,le know nothing about immigration and far less know what to do about it. Throwing out all the "mojados" will not do a thing about the thousands coming in each year, ans closing the borders, ha ha, yeah thats the answer, oh what about the minuteman, well I just wait for the day a gun fight erupts and see how fast the whole damn thing gets into a crap shoot. Smart answers will not come form Congress or the current administration, that seem to only be worried about the next election, like that matters, come on. I think we are all smart enough to know that's never going to change. New groups, te parties, what good are they, they have now started to endorse candidates; tea party or independents, yeah! Or should I say no.

I was watching a Spanish talk show that is for pure entertainment, but today they should have been ashamed of what they called a "real" conversation about immigration. All the whites were obviously plants or rather actors specially the more vocal ones. All the Hispanics were trashing and screaming, (stereotype, ok wrong man to say that since I am quite loud, I call it passion) calling out names, screaming racist, jeez. Nothing but a show! The problem is that this type of "entertainment" does nothing but instigate and people that are either ignorant or believe everything they see on screen will believe and do the same thing those damn morons on screen were doing, nice job. Of course, you know this happens in the English channels also. It really is infuriating to me. I decided to look put down the truths I know, only personal and only in my experiences.

I entered this country illegally and the "coyote" that crossed us into the US was an immigration officer, well the wife and sons crossed. Very simple to do, in the back seat when you know who is working the shacks. Everything for a buck! After in the US, we were placed in school thje same week in fact, and my father worked hard, many times at the minimum wage, $3 something, m,y mother worked hard also, in the home, my father wanted her to stay at home, yeah I know his problem, macho! Since the very beginning he worked to get us legal, trust me you do not want to be in line at 4am waiting to go into the INS offices for a permit that cost under a hundred dollars and should be so easily given and not make people wait for hours on end. Finally, we became residents and now my father is a citizen and I am not, don't get me started on that one, because it was a @!$%# up by my dear sister. This is the norm, not all the crap that "Mexicans" come top steal jobs or steal from goods hard working people. Mexicans get the rap because they are the closest to the border but the reality is illegal immigrant come from all over the world, and many also come in legally and become illegal. Here is a link that will guide you to statistics tables if you care to see. Hispanics fall between whites and blacks in crimes. Shows like that one instead of trying to quench the fire by educating their viewer are making the fire so much hotter.

Nest time you see an argument or next time you want to know something, why not go straight to the source and not assume you know it all because of what yo have heard. I need much work on this subject, I also get sidetracked by stereotypes and heated arguments, but I can honestly say I am trying hard not to, I am trying to be better in understanding and of course, have to keep the hope that we will come out of this unscathed!

Interesting article worth reflecting upon...

Time to lighten the conversations just a little and get cerebral.

Unless the USA leads the way in radically changing our planet to a system of global governance, humanity on the planet earth is doomed. My opinion.

Today America is the nation of humans with the most power, influence and resources to lead in the proper governance of the planet.

We can lead in the wrong or right direction.

Tomorrow the Chinese (NOT the Chinese government) based on sheer numbers of humans will determine the fate of the planet.

There needs to be the beginning of universal governance now - a council of all nations with the authority to guide humanity and supersede individual national rogue governments.

There should be one consolidated global agency to enforce the laws of nature. All military and law enforcement agencies in the world should be subordinate and part of the fabric of this agency supplying the necessary resources to insure humans abide by the laws of nature. there should be no war, famine, poverty, disease or crime.

These laws of nature should be based on "science and fact" and require the conservation, preservation and restoration of nature including benign methods of population management and control to prevent overpopulation of species on the planet. Presently humans are the most prevalent species at fault, yet are best equipped to manage themselves.

Education and knowledge and learning and teaching should be the full time job of each and every human. there are numerous categories of work for individuals such as agriculture, aquaculture, ecology, science, medicine etc etc

The exploration and colonization of our universe should be the ultimate goal of humans who can acquire the necessary intelligence.

Humans should allocate natural resources on earth so that there is no surplus except for necessary reserves. There should be no need for individual compensation but instead a 100% contribution of effort to the community. food, housing and clothing will be supplied by the planet and allocated by the custodians of the planet - humans.

There should be no surplus to fight over. The uneducated should be educated included those confined for breaking the laws of the planet who shall be rehabilitated when appropriate. There should be no poverty. Education and colonization of other planets will solve the problems associated with over population, ignorance and poverty. Criminals will be confined but made to contribute to society as well.

There are enough natural resources on the planet to provide everyone with an above average standard of living.

Conservation rather than consumption should be the foundation for economic theory.

WE humans live on heaven - for heaven is earth. My opinion.

Am I wrong about all of this?

This was the headline of an article I came across this morning - I didn't read it but I know the answer.

Like television the internet has slowly been taken over by capitalism - what I mean is that people with inside knowledge and money are using the internet more each day to manipulate what we buy, how we think and ultimately how we live.

Ebay for example can tweak a few algorithms and manipulate the number of views a seller gets or which items a buyer sees that are available for sale. Free market principals for the small seller get lost in the profit goals of a huge corporate entity. Large sellers with greater resources and inside knowledge have a distinct advantage over smaller sellers and even buyers.

Corporations routinely manipulate data about their customers and people to maximize their profits - and google is no different.

Advertising and propaganda are one and the same. If it's not true or misleading it could be an advertising error but 99% of the time it is an intended distortion of the facts.Information should be certified in an advertisement as being true and not misleading. But then the corporatist would accuse the Government of interfering with our lives. In fact it is the corporatists who are taking over our lives.

Discrediting the Government has become a popular past time for the corporate world. The only entity that stands between Americans and total control of our lives by the corporations is OUR Government. The democratic party while not pure is a least aligned with the individual.

The GOP and other factions are aligned with money and power which is what Corporatism is all about. When large companies hire you out of college they cream skim the best and then pigeon hole them and diminish their value and their skills and ability to seek employment elsewhere diminishes with time -you become a specialized custom widget for the corporation that employs you. If your a common laborer they leverage your need for a job - you become disposable or even worse you ARE discarded! Commonality is not restricted to the uneducated and often a skilled laborer has an advantage over a white collar college graduate and certainly an unskilled laborer.

The more college graduates the less valuable they become and the more institutionalized they become.

Search results are determined by algorithms that google, yahoo and Bing develop - supposedly based on an unbiased evaluation of the content on a website. However this has become a science which very few people can understand or take advantage of - some will argue that it is simply the survival of the fittest. But what is not obvious is that insiders have a huge advantage - often even concocted in a boardroom or executive planning meeting.

I have experienced manipulation at the highest levels of companies such as Direct TV in association with wildblue satellite internet service. My story if I had to tell it would cause some to say I'm crazy. But the truth is they were manipulating customers into requesting services that were not needed in order to keep their independent contractors making money and available for installations.

Often large corporations make mistakes and executives have a cya mentality that leads to customers suffering and low level employees beeing scapegoated.

I expect everyone reading this knows exactly what I'm talking about.

This is a subject that could go on forever.

The simple question is do we want corporations to rule our lives or do we want to govern ourselves by getting involved and supporting our elected representatives.

The nation is facing a difficult decision - protect the corporations or protect the individual citizen. There is no compromise. The supreme court has been tainted by republican politics and skewed to favor corporations over individuals.

For decades money has replaced ability and inherited wealth and education have become weapons rather than tools. The media is corporatized and compromised and the media is our eyes and ears to the world around us. Perception is reality - but in truth on TV it's manufactured fiction. Life has become a reality show that is fiction.

What do you think?

Seems everything about our planet centers around being white unless of course you live in China. As a child you inherit your way of thinking from your surroundings and your parents. Happy, unhappy - words of hate, love, fear - @!$%#, spic, gook etc

The end product is embedded in each of us - I was fortunate though - I was white.

Even better I was a male. Although at the time I was growing up I didn't realize the benefits that come with being a white male.

As a white male looking back I was treated better than women or non-white males. It was easier for me. Still I wasn't aware at the time.

Who taught me that white males are the supreme rulers? No one - it's just the way it was and it's the way some want it to be now.

The problem with this way of life isn't the color of our skin. We humans are flawed - in the way we think and act. We each define what is right and wrong -and what to forgive or not to forgive. We each individually don't like humans who are different than ourselves, color, weight, cosmetic features all influence the way we think and the way we act towards one another.

All of us believe we are better than other humans to a greater or lessor degree. But the perfect human would act human - according to our own definition of the word human! WE are all equal - not just humans but all life is equal. Because the end of life is the same for anything that lives.

Being human. What does that mean to you? Are you human or inhuman? Use your time wisely. If there is to be retribution and a life hereafter most of us are doomed.

Is being human wanting more than you need? Is being human taking away from others so you can have more?

Or is being human kindness and love and bravery? Compassion for others and tolerance?

We say that utopia is not achievable - yet it is - but only if we establish boundaries. Freedom was not meant to allow us to mistreat one another or ignore the plight of other humans less fortunate.

The boundaries of our humanity at this stage are very primitive. This is because as a species we are evolving.

I believe humans are the result of cross breeding apes with extra-terrestrial life. Crazy?

How do you explain our self-awareness and our ability to learn and imagine - we have not been around long enough for it to be natural evolution.

The question is - will we be evolving for better or for worse?

What do you think?

When the cops come around and take a local resident into custody, it's pretty standard to hear the neighbors chatting with members of the media, voicing surprise and offering words of support for the party under arrest. Yesterday, in towns and villages just like yours, this very scene played out in multiple instances as the FBI closed out a long investigation of a Russian-sponsored infiltration into the heart of middle class America.

The FBI placed ten people under arrest Sunday, with one other (at this writing) still at large. Trained by the Russian intelligence service, the SVR, and mostly placed in pairs as couples beginning in the mid-Nineties, their mission appears to be both vague and ambitious — to develop relationships with the influential and the knowledgeable, to obtain information regarding the CIA, US nuclear policy, relations with foreign powers, etc., and to recruit high-level government employees. Funny, I get most of that from the internet without all the fuss and muss of trying to corral a bunch of Russians set loose in our giant Disneyland.

The big question in all of this isn't why the Russians did this. Vladimir Putin, the Russian Prime Minister at the time and a former KGB chief, has a natural affinity for undercover operations. Our why is his why not? Nor is it why the Justice Department, through two full administrations, allowed these people to operate (albeit under strict surveillance) in our country. It's likely, over time, that the Russians became aware of our counter-intelligence activity, in a case of, we know that you know that we know…. The question is, why do it now? The official line given is that a prompt shutdown of the whole operation was due to one of the group scheduling a permanent return to Russia. Hmm … That sounds just a bit fishy. I have a better explanation.

Recently, the Obama administration has used the State Department to reestablish a dialog with Moscow, culminating with a recent visit by Russian President Medvedev to meet with the President . The timing of the arrests, along with the blaring publicity accompanying them, appears orchestrated to chill relations between the two countries. Consider that the charges are money laundering (for bringing in the payroll and expense money from South America), living under a false identity, and "belonging" to a spy ring. There appears to be no evidence suggesting that any of these spies were effective at doing their jobs. There appears to be no benefit to the US, strategically, to drop the hammer now.

So, who does benefit? For that, we need to flip the question around and decide who might feel threatened by closer ties between Russia and the United States. There's always China, Inc. The economic expansion on the mainland is subject to many variables, some within the power of China's leadership to control, such as relations with Taiwan (which have never been better) or the exchange rate of the Renminbi. What they can't control is the availability of those natural resources necessary to sustain the expansion. Russia, along with Australia, is a key supplier of iron ore. Russia remains the primary source for nickel. While South Africa supplies the bulk of the world's chromium, Russia is also a major producer. Access to these elements is a key to China's continued growth. Any threat, in the form of state-sponsored boycott or slowdown of delivery, could be catastrophic. A Russian-US alliance represents a formidable wall in the path to China's economic domination.

If you don't like China, there's always the European Union to consider. EU members, especially Germany and the former Soviet satellites, view any Russian partnership as a threat. For such an alliance to include Uncle Sam, the degree of hysteria mounts. There is no more powerful grouping, in terms of weaponry, than that of those Cold War adversaries. Together, they could easily hold the entire world hostage. For a Europe that's known the devastation of total war, the mere possibility of facing such power is cause for nightmares. It would be in the European interest to short circuit any broad understanding in a Russo-American pact.

So, that spy next door, trimming the rhododendrons and driving the kids to school, is nothing compared to the operatives working within our own government, on behalf of China or the EU, to affect policy change through fiat. Hell, it's just as likely that those spies grew to love America and might deign to lift a finger in anger against us; our bigger worry should be those real Americans lurking in the shadows of our most solid upright pillars. As the nosy neighbor tells the inquiring reporter – "I never, in my wildest imaginings, thought they could be against us." The truth is, anyone can be against us. Keep your eyes open.

The republican party and radical right are by far the most dangerous threats to America today. More so than terrorism or communism or any foreign nuclear power.

The GOP is a Trojan horse financed by the over-privileged wealthy and powerful corporate interests that own and influence everything you hear see and think each day of your life. In America and worldwide.

The GOP and the embedded far right wing are a propaganda machine built with money to influence government, American and world society and take away human freedom, equality and justice for all.

Humanity has been slowly conditioned over the last centuries to accept environmental pollution, war, disease, crime, poverty, hunger and ultimately financial slavery. The cards have been stacked against most humans.

Conventional wisdom is used by the establishment to control the minds of we the mindless. We vote - but what for?

Distracting us using anger and hate those in power must covertly oppose a free society if they wish to maintain the empire they've created with wealth - they ultimately determine which humans live or die. A child in Africa, an elderly person in Chicago - they're all the same. The health control battle was the coming out party for the over-privileged - where they openly gnashed their teeth and showed their venom. Quite frankly - it's us or them.

Money is the divining factor, especially in America - when you have it you are in control - when you don't you are financially enslaved.

Education and inherited wealth are important weapons used by those in power which stack the deck in favor of mostly white supremacists. Expensive Universities have become factories churning out the white master race. Rubber stamped corporatists assume control and embed the tentacles of capitalism in every aspect of our lives.

The politics of me, me, me is no longer disguised as in the past but now is openly embraced by the GOP. Lies are spoken in the face of truth. Falsehoods are blatantly substituted for facts. FOX news leads the way.

Racism and bigotry play an important role in maintaining a political system that separates the over-privileged from the under-privileged.

At any given moment each of us is either over-privileged or under-privileged (most of us) - the struggle for the top is perpetual.

Those at the top remain there by creating fear and distrust and hatred and those of us who seek to join the over-privileged rather then seek the truth will never scale the heights of power.

This minority of over-privileged humans control our planet and the majority of the worlds humans are under the control and influence of the rich and powerful.Governments converse with Governments - the masses in different nations have no way of communicating directly without being suppressed and filtered and censored. Technology has played a role in freeing the masses but is also now being slowly designed to control the masses. The internet will replace the role of media in the battle for control of our minds.

Laws are created by those in power that favor those in power, and contain the majority of humans who lack the resources to take control.

Tax laws, criminal laws, civil laws - all purposely complicated beyond the comprehension of the majority of humans and designed to enslave humanity.

President Obama understands what is right and what is wrong with Government and with humanity.

And the over-privileged who wish to weaken our federal Government and complete the establishment of corporate governance recognize him as a threat.

Only the masses can empower our Government under his leadership to begin to return earth to humanity.

In the America we live in, we have been afforded the right not to agree with what someone says, but defend their right to the death to say it. It is called freedom of speech.

Left-Wing, Right-Wing, stop trying to kill the other. No use crippling your opposition.

It takes both wings for our body politic to fly.

Not scrabble along on the ground, dismaying both sides.

So where has it gotten us so far?
Divided. Crippled economy.
Citizens feeling left out and ignored.
Corporations trying to kill each other or swallow each other up.

Too big to fail?

I say too big to exist.

and that goes for government too.

After all the government is made up of people and if it gets too big, it gets too hard for the rest of the population to support them.

Government is actually on Public Welfare. And why should anyone in government get more than anyone on welfare.

If anyone is going to get a paycut, it should be everyone in government. From the top down.

Starting from the top down.

I've been an early responder when it comes to the coffee party - I like the emphasis on civility - I like the sphere tool which facilitates people of unlike minds to debate civilly - and I really like the fact that OUR Government is looked at as something we own - not the lobbyists and special interests who presently influence it so much.
In contrast the tea party is uncivil, radical and very bitter and "fringey"

One of the many important things OUR President is placing emphasis on - to those who are so concerned about their children and grand children having bills too pay - I say how about leaving them a planet they can live on!!!!

There’s a Holy war going on, the Afghanistan war, and the war amongst us, within each town, city state, country. And there are all of the people fighting against the Government trying to give everyone better opportunities.

People just don’t seem to have any positive thinking or hope anymore. Even before anything happens, everyone expects the worst.

All of the negativity that comes from everyone is just going to make things worse. We are supposed to get better and more united towards one common goal…

What’s happening to the world?

Do we need more killing, more hate, more violence?

Where is the peace everyone keeps talking about?

Where’s the love everyone? Anybody knows??

By the Black Eyed Peas:

What's wrong with the world mama?
People living like ain’t got no mamas
I think the whole worlds addicted to the drama
Only attracted to the things that bring you trauma
Overseas yeah we trying to stop terrorism
But we still got terrorists here living
In the USA the big CIA the Bloodz and the Crips and the KKK
But if you only have love for your own race
Then you only leave space to discriminate
And to discriminate only generates hate
And if you hating you're bound to get irate
Yeah madness is what you demonstrate
And that's exactly how anger works and operates
You gotta have love just to set it straight
Take control of your mind and meditate
Let your soul gravitate to the love y'all

People killing people dying
Children hurting you hear them crying
Can you practice what you preach
Would you turn the other cheek?
Father Father Father help us
Send some guidance from above
Cause people got me got me questioning
Where is the love?

It just ain't the same all ways have changed
New days are strange is the world the insane?
If love and peace so strong
Why are there pieces of love that don't belong
Nations dropping bombs
Chemical gases filling lungs of little ones
With ongoing suffering
As the youth die young
So ask yourself is the loving really strong?
So I can ask myself really what is going wrong
With this world that we living in
People keep on giving in
Makin wrong decisions
Only visions of them livin and
Not respecting each other
Deny thy brother
The wars' going on but the reasons' undercover
The truth is kept secret
Swept under the rug
If you never know truth
Then you never know love
Where's the love y'all?(I don't know)

I feel the weight of the world on my shoulder
As I'm getting older y'all people get colder
Most of us only care about money making
Selfishness got us following the wrong direction
Wrong information always shown by the media
Negative images is the main criteria
Infecting their young minds faster than bacteria
Kids wanna act like what they see in the cinema
Whatever happened to the values of humanity
Whatever happened to the fairness and equality
Instead of spreading love, we're spreading animosity
Lack of understanding, leading us away from unity
That's the reason why sometimes I'm feeling under
That's the reason why sometimes I'm feeling down
It's no wonder why sometimes I'm feeling under
I gotta keep my faith alive, until love is found

People killing people dying
Children hurting you hear them crying
Can you practice what you preach
Would you turn the other cheek?
Father Father Father help us
Send some guidance from above
Cause people got me got me questioning
Where is the love?

I found this article and I wanted to share it with all of you. Some of you will not like it but I feel there is alot of Truth in it and I give a big thumbs up to Mr. David Jolly.

A quote from one of my favorite movies and it sounded fitting. Really, for months we have been hearing what the American people want or don't want, depending on what channel you view or listen to. Now, to be honest, I really did not want the health bill, hr4872, trust me when I say I will neither forget the date or the bill number, to pass. The cost was not part of the equation, I just don't believe that making deals or finding gimmicks to pass a bill is in the best interest of the country. Don't get me wrong, the pettiness showed by the republicans was not in our best interest either. The cost will be paid by the rich, poor, middle, class, anybody, everybody!

Now, do we need health care for everyone int the country? Yes, simply because preventive care will be less costly than waiting until people have either a disease or ailment, oh wait maybe not, since insurance companies could deny care if you had a preexisting problem, then the country would end up taking the cost. But none of this bothered me more than these two aspects of today. (1) No channel interrupted their schedule to bring the vote, wow, I thought it was really important. (2) When I finally found the television coverage, I caught a Rep. from Michigan (please anybody correct me if I got it wrong and allow me to paraphrase) was saying that "he was glad that now expecting mothers would not have to resort to abortions because they every life from conception to elder age deserves health care." Let me get this right, expecting mothers go get abortions because they don't think they can afford the kid? The rich do not abort children? Am I to believe that a major factor in having an abortion is cost of raising a child?

I am done with government and analysts, jeez, what a bunch of b.s. I was planning on going online to find some numbers to support this stupid rant, but I am too upset, tired, ignorant, uneducated, opinionated, you name it, I am. Now, when after 3-4 years when I have government health care, for every pain, scratch, ingrown nail, ingrown hair on my ass, expect me to go wait countless hours to get it fixed, i am sure to see some of you there, good night and truly, may this country become "Off the people," once again.

I've gotten tired of all the political drama on the 'vine. With the holidays around the corner, thought this would be a nice change.

So, what is the best gift you've ever recieved and given?

Ok so many want god taken away from the pledge of allegiance and taken from money. To an Atheist like me, none of that bothers me, I take it as part of history. I do believe that prayer does not belong in school, in fact the whole religion thing should be left for homes and places of worship. Just this Halloween during the festival there were a few students in Madison's class whom did not participate because of their religious beliefs or rather their parents beliefs since they are far to young to understand what religion or why they are the only ones that cannot dress up or enjoy does yummy orange cup cakes. It is commercial holiday nothing more, we all know the origins but now-a-days it is simply for the costume companies and the candy stores.

So god does not belong in government, so does government belong in god/church? If a school is private, catholic and receives no money from the government, should they have to abide by the governments tests, rules, holidays or should they be left alone to do as they see fit.

WARNING: DISCLAIMER This is solely my opinion. Many of my opinions stated within this article have been formulated by learning about how some of the programs work and some personal experiences. This is the first of a series of articles I will writing.

Is Homelessness a society issue or is it a community issue? Should the government try or give out grants to stop the growth of homeless individuals throughout the nation. Bush though it was;

"WASHINGTON- Housing and Urban Development Secretary Mel Martinez has announced the largest amount of homeless assistance in the nation's history - more than $1.1 billion to fund thousands of local housing and service programs around the country. Yesterday's announcement signals a continuing effort by the Bush Administration to focus more resources on providing permanent housing and supportive services to homeless individuals, including those persons who have mental illnesses, addictions or are physically disabled." {1}

The current administration has set some of the stimulus package as a family homeless prevention program, to the tune of 1.5 billion dollars, HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) will be the agency awarding the funds. {2} So it would seem that both parties agree that homelessness needs to end. It is true that a big amount of money is being spent in grants for emergency shelters, homelessness prevention, and other re-housing programs, but is all this money and effort worth it?

A few months ago I would have said no. So much money for a problem to to be honest I never really though about. Sure we all see them from time to time; they are usually hanging around stores or gas stations. Have you ever stopped and talk to one of these misfortunate individuals. We might think that they are with out homes because they are lazy, drunks, or addicts, but the numbers show that the majority of these human being have mental illnesses. "Up to 50 percent have co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders." {3} The reasons for homeless individuals are many but homeless families is the fastest growing group.

Is helping these families stay under a roof up to the government, sure it is. If the government was to let these families lose their homes they would end up in emergency shelter, or family re-housing programs. According to a studies it more cos effective to help failies stay in permanent housing than have them ending up at an emergency shelter or even worse the hospital because of posible injuriies or disseases caused by living on th streets. Two recently released studies, one in Denver, Colorado (see Chart 3), and the other in Portland, Oregon, showed that the net public cost was less when individuals were in permanent housing than when they were homeless." {4} So it would seem that by preventing homelessness te government is in effect cuting cost of the plethora of services homeless families would most certaily end up using.

To appreciate the immense cost that a single homeless individual can rack up, one needs to only look up The Story of Million-Dollar Murray, a chronically homeless, alcoholic man whom also had mental health Issues. He was in and out of jail and hospitals for over ten years costing the Washoe County, Nevada 1 million dollars in total, for all the services he used. After realizing the enormity of the homeless problem Washoe County started addressing the reasons for homelessness rather then the homeless problem itself. The Washoe Homeless Study concluded that it would be more cost effective to provide permanent housing instead of having homeless individuals like murray use homeless shelter, hospital, jail, ambulance, and many more services. {5}

It would seem that homelessness in America is not only a growing problem that although we do not choose to see it or we just ignore, but also a problem that is costing this country a huge amount of resources and money. Is homelessness an issue that the government needs to correct is a matter of individual opinion, My opinion is yes, homelessness cost money from many different outlets whether we want to pay or not we will end up paying. I say yes to the rapid re-housing and permanent housing programs they are more cost effective. Housing is not the only service that these programs offer, they offer many more, such as medical, veteran, job placement, mental health, etc. services.

{1} source

{2} source

{3} source

{4} source

{5}
source

WARNING: DISCLAIMER This is solely my opinion. Many of my opinions stated within this article have been formulated by learning about how some of the programs work and some personal experiences. This is the first of a series of articles I will writing.

While Having a conversation with a friend a question arose; what is the role of government, what is the government's duty to it's citizens? I don't think I had looked up the word in years so I did.
Government:
1 : the act or process of governing; specifically : authoritative direction or control
2 obsolete : moral conduct or behavior : discretion
3 a : the office, authority, or function of governing b obsolete : the term during which a governing official holds office
4 : the continuous exercise of authority over and the performance of functions for a political unit : rule
5 a : the organization, machinery, or agency through which a political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually classified according to the distribution of power within it b : the complex of political institutions, laws, and customs through which the function of governing is carried out
6 : the body of persons that constitutes the governing authority of a political unit or organization: as a : the officials comprising the governing body of a political unit and constituting the organization as an active agency b capitalized : the executive branch of the United States federal government c capitalized : a small group of persons holding simultaneously the principal political executive offices of a nation or other political unit and being responsible for the direction and supervision of public affairs: (1) : such a group in a parliamentary system constituted by the cabinet or by the ministry (2) : administration 4b. {1}
Straight forward and simple, correct. Not so fast this definition states nothing about taking care of its citizens. Should the government be responsible for more then creating laws and defending our borders, treaties, or interests. My friend friend told me that the role of government, in his opinion, is to take care of it's citizens be them indigent, wealthy, intelligent, moronic, fanatics, Republicans, Democrats, Independent, disabled, veteran, homeless, etc. to provide the people with security, protection, health care, housing and nutrition, education, retirement, etc., and to protect us from foreign and domestic threats. Well sure, many Americans think all this is to be provided by the governing body, but get upset when taxes get raised. Ah yes, taxes. Taxes is a necessity, how else is the government to pay all its workers and the services they provide? Of course better management of funds is definitely needed in the USA.

Is that it is to provide its citizens with all the services needed then then we are to take care of everyone, and everyone the same. This to me means rich, poor, elderly, children, White, Black, Asians, Hispanics, everyone would be eligible to receive the services provided by our government, not the rich paying for the poor, but if the individuals had available funds to have better providers than that would be their choice. That can't happen because the price tab would be too high. Many they should not take care of us, maybe we would do a better job, but about all those who can't take care of themselves, should we leave them out in the cold, freezing night, or out in the pasture for the wolves to eat them, should it be up to the people to decide how to take care of those citizens. A much important question, is everyone within our borders citizens or should we provide only the least necessities for those who are not naturalized? everyone has opinions on how the government should react to certain issues or how they should waste our money, but if we do not run for office should that not our officials business, wait their is nothing in the above definition about government being a business, or maybe the definition is a bit archaic.

This is an open letter to my fellow American citizens about our government's corruption and disregard of the public.

Maybe it is, but there is something even stronger; the will of the people. We have become a nation of complaining, do nothing, I want it all paid by the government lazy citizens. No? Maybe not but we have certainly have been going downhill for a while now.

If you can pronounce this, then maybe you can understand what the United States has become. This Country was once know for its citizens being allowed to achieve the American Dream.

Simple question and I feel a legitimate one. Showing that I'm not a blind Obama supporter, I'm going to ask this question. Is it possible for the government to both own General Motors AND regulate it fairly?

It sure did creep up on us. For twenty years we have been bagging criminals of all stripes and stuffing them in prison to do serious hard time. Now that the economy has gone south and taken tax receipts along with it, it has become a practical fact that states like mine (Ohio) are going to have to find a way to release some of our prisoners because we cannot afford the $45K/yr price tag to keep these inmates locked up and fed.

I had discovered this was a growing problem about four years ago when I met a woman and in the course of our conversation she related to me that her brother was in prison. For what? I asked. She told me he had been convicted of assault, possession of powerful explosives and statutory rape for having sex with a 15 year old. She also told me that he was getting out of prison. I asked her how much of his sentence he had served and she told me he had served two and a half years of a possible ten year sentence. I was pretty surprised and said that he must have exhibited very good behavior to get 75% of his sentence commuted. Much to the contrary, she informed me. They had put him in "The Hole" (solitary confinement) to punish him for bad behavior and, while he was there, he managed to rip his sink out of the wall and accomplish other sundry damage to his lodgings. His sister also told me that he was being released because the Ohio prison system was overcrowded with inmates and that she did not think he was ready to be paroled. His own sister did not think he should be out roaming the streets of society. It really says something when your sibling thinks you should be kept like a caged animal at the zoo and it says something very disturbing.

What is it that has caused this surge in inmates? The "get tough" stance on drugs within the last two decades. Most drug offenders are not violent, they are simply an annoying blight on the face of society. Despite their non-violent status, they still get hauled off for an all-expenses-paid stay at the cost of the taxpayer. Don't get me wrong, I'm aware that drug addiction can lead to more problematic crimes. But it doesn't happen with most drug addicts. I was under the impression that we built penitentiaries to house violent people that would hurt other people if they were allowed to roam free. You know, murderers, rapists, armed robbers, child molesters, child killers, etc. People that cause serious damage to someone besides themselves. Because of our stance on drug offenders we are edging towards a very dangerous action that we are going to be financially forced to take which is to release violent offenders as part of paroling old convicts to make room for new convicts. I, for one, would prefer that the violent animals we already have behind bars stay there for good. It's time to look into alternatives that protect society from the greatest criminal threat: criminals that abuse, injure or kill others.

The mildest solution that has come to my mind is to scrap prison time for drug addicts in favor of a fine which would be plowed directly into supporting the operation of the prison system. In this way, drug addicts' behavior is still being modified to a degree and we are keeping the truly dangerous cats inside their concrete holes. A more radical idea I had was to legalize marijuana altogether, tax it, and plow that into the fund used to operate the prison system. The government could then control and profit from what is currently an illicit, blackmarket business. Plus, I find someone that smokes pot to be much less dangerous than a fellow that slaughtered eight people with a machete or a gang member that executes hits on innocent civilians because they are a hurdle to the gang conducting its illegal moneymaking ventures.

The bottom line is that we are coming upon a choice we are going to have to make about what we classify as important priorities to protect society from and what society can tolerate. What say you?

It strikes me odd that central banks have always printed money out of thin air but act like they can't or won't now.

How is the US going to contribute its part of $1 Trillion to this ponzi scheme fund?

There is growing concern over the upcoming G20 Summit in London this Thursday as well there should be. I believe that the average citizen shies away from the subject of money/economics on a country-wide or global scale because of the overwhelming amount of complexity that has been created around trading of stocks and other investment activities. However, it is very important that we not be intimidated by all the various financial/economic concepts because in the end, they merely serve to strengthen the grandest of illusions under which humanity has been spellbound for a few hundred years – money.

The first thing you need to know is who the players are in this summit. The finance ministers and central bank governors of the twenty economically wealthiest nations comprise the membership that includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, and also the European Union who is represented by the rotating Council presidency and the European Central Bank.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the body that officiates and provides leadership over the G20 Summit, consists of the same 185 countries that are part of the World Bank. Since the IMF has 185 members, why are only 20 being invited to a meeting that has goals of overhauling the global economic/financial system? Both the IMF and the World Bank have their origins based on actions by a precursor group to the United Nations to fight economic instability and poverty yet, there are still seven nations who are UN members but don't meet the criteria to be a member of the IMF and World Bank. The problem such a gathering presents is the exclusion of 176 countries (there are approximately 195 countries recognized by the U.S. but the U.N. only recognizes 192) that are left out of this process and have no voice in the how monetary/economic policy is developed. There is an even higher level of banking power known as The Bank for International Settlements that provides leadership, policy guidance and loans to the world's central banking systems exclusively.

The next thing you need to know is the shift in the balance of economic power based on currency that Brazil, Russia, India, and China are proposing that has everyone worried about the possibility of a one-world currency. In 1969, the IMF created Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) to support the fixed exchange rate system in which participating countries needed to have reserves of gold and U.S. dollars in order to buy domestic currencies on the foreign exchange market. Since there was not enough gold or dollars available internationally, SDR currency was changed from gold and U.S. dollars to a mixture of widely-accepted currencies that include the dollar, the sterling pound, the euro, and the yen. Each country receives an allotment of this currency mix which also translates into voting rights within the IMF based on a series of five, complex formulas. Of course, the U.S. has a whopping 16% share while nearly all other countries have less than 1% (Germany has the 2nd highest level of voting rights at a little over 5%). Consider what is being discussed at the upcoming summit as a very slight adjustment to accommodate the allocations to emerging economies. Special Drawing Rights are supposed to be based upon a country's creditworthiness and currently, the U.S. has the largest national debt in the world. Given the fact that Brazil, Russia, India, and China own a great deal of that debt, this gives them leverage to eventually have the currencies in the SDRs on par with their own currencies.

The last thing you need to know is that in a world where most countries use a fiat currency system (money not backed by reserves of gold or other widely-accepted commodities but by faith), there should NEVER be a shortage of money or credit in the banking system since they are the ones that make the rules and control the supply of money. They can print up as much money as they like and pass it out to EVERYONE (they're already doing it for everyone except regular citizens) and that would actually help them actually eliminate the poverty they claim they want to end. Let's look at the mission statements of the world's top banking organizations:

IMF
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an organization of 185 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.

World Bank

At the World Bank we have made the world's challenge—to reduce global poverty—our challenge.The Bank's focuses on achievement of the Millennium Development Goals that call for the elimination of poverty and sustained development. The goals provide us with targets and yardsticks for measuring results. Our mission is to help developing countries and their people reach the goals by working with our partners to alleviate poverty. We address global challenges in ways that advance an inclusive and sustainable globalization—that overcome poverty, enhance growth with care for the environment, and create individual opportunity and hope.

If these powerful organizations were sincere about their missions, there would be a LOT more progress made toward that end. However, they are in the business of perpetuating debt and with 185 countries/central banks as members, I think the utter failure in achieving their missions speaks volumes about the true intent of banks and governments toward the citizens of this planet. They could end so much suffering at any time by making rules about money that benefit the many instead of the few. Add all the economic rhetoric you would like but it still boils down to an elaborate ponzi scheme that keeps most of the world's population oppressed.

Dear President Obama:

I want to first applaud you for some of the wonderful gestures made by you such as setting a timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq, stopping DEA raids on medical marijuana dispensaries, and plans to sign the UN declaration on decriminalizing homosexuality.

However, there a few HUGE mistakes being made and I hope that whoever receives this message will make sure that you read it.

1. Buying toxic assets - The overwhelming majority of US citizens do NOT want their money spent on buying the bundles of defaulted mortgages, credit card, student, car and other loans that make up these "securities" which in and of itself is a misnomer. These loans are NOT assets (another misnomer), they are WORTHLESS. Banks must take their losses for these items instead of being re-capitalized with more citizen debt that will never be paid back to us. Toxic assets will ALWAYS remain toxic because the original borrowers are unable to pay back their debt, especially in this current economic climate. This plan was misguided when former Secretary Paulson suggested it and it remains so under Secretary Geithner for the above-mentioned reasons.

2. Recovery.gov Major Shortcomings - While I can appreciate you wanting to provide transparency and accountability through this website, the reporting guidelines contain the same type of hidden time bomb loophole as the Economic Recovery Act bill itself in regards to executive compensation. President Obama, you have said that the Recovery.gov website will show where EVERY dollar goes and the effect it has in recovery. Unfortunately, this will not occur due not only to the sheer volume of reports to be entered on the website but because there are NO reporting requirements for three-fifths of funding recipients. In the OMB Initial Implementation Guidance Memo M-9-10 dated 2/18/09, issued by Director Peter Orszag, Section 2.9, Page 14 it states:

The Recovery Act and this guidance require extensive reporting from recipients of Federal funding. The Recovery Act defines "recipient" as any entity that receives Recovery Act funds directly from the Federal Government (including Recovery Act funds received through grant, loan, or contract) other than an individual and includes a State that receives Recovery Act funds. See Section 1512 of the Recovery Act.
These requirements apply to:

Prime recipients. Reporting requirements only apply to the prime non-Federal recipients of Federal funding, and the subawards (i.e., subgrants, subcontracts, etc.) made by these prime recipients. They do not require each subsequent subrecipient to also report. For instance, a grant could be given from the Federal government to State A, which then gives a subgrant to City B (within State A), which hires a contractor to construct a bridge, which then hires a subcontractor to supply the concrete. In this case, State A is the prime recipient, and would be required to report the subgrant to City B. However, City B does not have any specific reporting obligations, nor does the contractor or subcontractor for the purposes of reporting for the Recovery.gov website. All recipients of Federal funds must continue to comply with existing agency and program reporting requirements.

Only recipients receiving awards funded through discretionary appropriations. These reporting requirements only apply to non-Federal recipients who receive funding provided through discretionary appropriations. The reporting requirements do not apply to funding received through entitlement or other mandatory programs, except as specifically required by OMB.

This is not transparency or accountability. You might want to check Mr. Orszag's reasoning for including this clause that is in direct contradiction to what you have told the American people.

3. Outlaw Credit Default Swaps (CDS) - There are many people who will tell you that there needs to be regulation on these fraudulent instruments when the truth of the matter is that they should be abolished. Their very nature creates false wealth (I was so happy to hear you mention "paper money" on Jay Leno though the brain-dead media didn't pick up on it!) from betting for or against assets/loans in which the holder of the CDS has no actual ownership. To make matters worse, most of the world is dealing in these instruments which have been given legitimacy since 1985 through the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. There are 820 financial institutions and 56 countries who are members of this organization that is supposed to regulate the CDS market. Why is no one tapping them for advice or closure?

President Obama, I know the difficult position in which you find yourself is the most challenging situation of your life thus far. I want to offer my spiritual support and advice. There are men and women around you caught up in self-interest and who will betray you while smiling in your face. Keep your counsel with the light I see in you for good karma.

I wrote this article to spark some courageous thinking and action that will get us out of the manufactured global economic crisis.

For college fans across the nation this is our downtime. A new national champion was crowned just about two months ago and now our favorite schools are busily recruiting this year's class of future stars and also rans. All of us, as fans, are confident that our favorite squad will be the next to carry home that BCS trophy and lock it away in our respective glass cases. For now though we rest, anticipating the upcoming season, and secretly wishing away the days between now and the opening day kick.

Since the inception of the BCS formula for choosing a champion, there has been a lot of controversy. Fans, coaches, and players alike have been calling for a change. Some want a playoff, some want a "plus one" scenario where there will be one extra game after the BCS games have taken place to determine the champion, and still others want to keep the old school methods and keep tradition alive.

Recently this issue has found its way into the realm of politics. In Texas, Joe Barton (R-Ennis), Ranking Member of the House and Energy Committee proposed a bill that will put forth measures that will "prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a post season game as a 'national championship' unless it is the result of a playoff system." Barton has teamed up with Bobby Rush (D-Illinois) and Michael McCaul (R-Texas) to push the bill.

Barton promoted his stance on ESPN and was challenged by a member of the BCS committee. The commitee member cited most the loss of tradition that would play out if a playoff system was iniated. Some believe that this stance by traditional BCS commitee members is due to the money that they stand to gain from the current system. Whether this is true or not remains to be seen, but the BCS has been a "cash cow" for corporations who put millions of dollars into sponsoring the bowl games. Is there still tradition? or Was that tradition lost when we started calling it the "Tostitos Fiesta Bowl" or the "Capital One Bowl" instead of simply the Fiesta Bowl or The Citrus Bowl?

Even newly elected president, Barrack Obama, shared his thoughts on the issues. When he was asked, on ESPN, what the one thing he would change about the world of athletics today, Obama responded by stating that he would institute a playoff system to decide the NCAA football bowl system champion. When the leader of the free world steps in and admits that it is time for a change, shouldn't we, as sports fan, stand up and listen? It is time for the old to be tossed out the door and the new to be ushered in. We need a playoff system now, so the Utah Utes, the USC Trojans, the Penn State Nittany Lions, and all the other teams that were left at home by their television as Florida took on Oklahoma, can have an equal shot at the title.

The role of the CIA's controversial prisoner-transfer program may expand, intelligence experts say.

by: Dani Bush

My father was 20 years old when he signed up for the US Army on May 1943, he worked on Steam Jenny's in Baltimore, MD. at the time Pearl Harbor had been bombed, this incident weighed on him as he enlisted in the war. He was assigned to the 1896th Aviation Engineers as a demolitions expert where he served on board the Kyle V Johnson,LST, at Lingayen Golf near Luzon in the South Pacific. He seen the death of 128 soldiers and 1 crew member on board after a Kamikazee hit the ship. There a soldier by the name of Charles Steinsen, from Allentown, PA. had taken my dad's watch to finish the last chapters of a book he was reading. The plane hit at dusk and a fire had to be put out, their was no time for proper burial of these men. The remaining men carried on their mission got the fire out and rejoined the fleet. He hardly ever talked about the war because it was too much, he had only told me this once and I wrote it down to remember what he had said. He talked about mainly the good times they had while there. Those precious few moments that they tried to be normal but this was few and far between. He sent most of his military allotment home to his mother to help her through tough times. He served till the war ended.

He had served in the Civil Conservation corp. when he was sixteen and seventeen years of age. Helping to build roads, bridges, and school houses. After the war he had worked in the coal mines of West Virginia and as a mason until his eyesight was taken away by cataracts. He lived on a meager pension and struggled the rest of his life, but he flew the American Flag proudly and was very patriotic. He died on May 19, 1995 at the Louis Johnson VA Medical Center at age seventy-two. After a long battle with colon cancer, and a tumor in his stomach. He had been sent home with five tubes in his stomach and had drop foot because they didn't exercise his legs while he was in the hospital. They had taken him by ambulance to the VA in Pennsylvania to do the surgery. This is a first hand account because I was there and witnessed his treatment The stomach tumor had grown from grape size to basketball size before they operated. They removed most of his stomach and large intestine. and then after three months tried to send him to Maryland by ambulance for physical therapy, they took one look at him and said their was nothing they could do because of all the tubes and sent him back to Clarksburg, WV Veterans Hospital and their he stayed for about a month and then he was sent home. Within three weeks he was sent back to the VA and there he died with his family around him.

Can we say that our veterans are taken care of, for all their sacrifices, their are many who are not treated the way they deserve for all they have done for us. They fight for our country, our freedom, our independence, but yet they still have minimal pay, medical care that is shameful, and benefits that don't even begin to cover what they deserve.

To fight and die for your fellow man is the ultimate sacrifice, yet their is no homecoming for many who have done this very thing. As a patriot and the daughter of a WWII veteran, I am saddened to the fact that more was not done then and still today not enough to honor them. Yes! They do enlist without force, they follow an honor code that many could never conceive. They go to work each day, ready for anything to happen. They lose arms, legs, and their life so we can be safe in our beds at night. The volunteer for this duty not because they have to but because they feel that overwhelming urge to protect their families, their country, and our way of life.

Yet what do we really do for them? Some may think enough, but the majority feels this is not the case. We honor them on Veterans Day and Memorial Day, but then what? If you are a family that has lost a soldier, whether it be during wartime or not, the pain is hard to bare. When you do not support them even if you may disagree with why they are their you are insulting the very core of why they do what they do. Their job is not to question, but to follow orders and with that they are the spine of our country. On those cold below zero days they are on watch, in the hundred degree days they are on watch, ever vigilante. When a disaster strikes they are their to pick us up out of the wreckage, and when we are in fear they give us strength. They deserve the best we can give them. Could you imagine what life would be like if they weren't there.

I can't and with that, God Bless all our servicemen and servicewomen who tow the line and keep us safe. May you all return home to your families in one piece and I support you.

We all should write our state and government officials and request that more should be done for our troops and their families.

by Dani Bush

How many promises has been broken,
Where many pockets have been lined,
And many special interest have been served,
Not yours or mine.

Does the poor have a chance,
Will the working class continue footing the bill,
Where our government really doesn't work for us,
Their on Capitol hill.

Can we continue on in this economy,
When corporations pull the strings,
While government spends our hard earned dollars,
And leave us waiting in the wings.

We now have a new hope,
A youthful Commander and Chief,
I pray has our best interest at heart,
With a swiftness gets rid of the thieves.

And while we wait patiently,
Working to make ends meet,
Wanting to get back to normal,
Because we don't believe in defeat.

So lets all roll up our sleeves,
As the generations before had done,
We work for our young children,
And their future is upon this one.

Socialism is probably one of the single most misunderstood political ideologies in the United States. Though the US had a sizable number of socialists at the turn of the century, the Cold War, McCarthyism, and the Red Scare have thrown it unceremoniously into the category of "extreme." Even today, right wingers are quick to scare people from supporting welfare reforms and higher taxes as being socialist; this is a blatant lie, one that I intend to lay to rest right now.

Socialism tells us one very important thing: workers should control what they produce. From this comes a plethora of ideas and inaccurate characterizations but it are, in truth, really quite sensible. Taking any average company, normally you have someone who is in charge, and then a hierarchy leading down to the lowest possessions which usually do all the work. Organization is a key part of society, but this hierarchy is an economic copy of the kind of despotic governments that democratic societies discarded long ago. It means a handful of people, with few checks and balances, decide, not only how much the producers make, but also how much they themselves make, an obvious problem when it comes to greed. This problem manifested itself quite fully during the Great Depression. Essentially it puts an unnecessary middle man between producing and purchasing. It means that a handful of people control what is produced, and can charge what they want to increase their own paychecks and possibly reduce the paychecks of workers, again, with no checks and balances. Socialism is an idea that seeks to eliminate the greedy middle man. Workers should control what they produce.

Socialism is not a form of government; it is an economic system. Socialist ideals are better at telling us what kind of government NOT to have then what government we should have. On the list of governments that simply cannot fulfill the ideals of socialism are monarchies, oligarchies, aristocracies, and dictatorships. These governments put one person in control, effectively making it impossible for the average person to share control in production, since the average person ultimately answers to one (or a few). Socialism then almost has to be very democratic in order to ensure the worker his equal say in production.

In essence, socialism is democratic economics. A simple transfer of the governmental organization we currently use, into the economic system. Putting workers in charge of economics prevents the same evils of greed, selfishness, and despotism that democracy does in government. The demonizing of socialist ideals has put this basic concept of democracy as the best form of societal control far from many American's minds.

It is also important to realize that socialism on a large scale has only ever been implemented in partial form. From the right we hear frequent examples of "socialist" governments like China, Venezuela, Cuba, and the former U.S.S.R.. Though these governments may have claimed socialist ideals, they have all been far from them; the socialist slogans used by these countries is about as meaningful as the names "The People's Republic of China" and "The Democratic Republic of the Congo" are to democracy. Again, the basic precept is that workers must control capital. Their economic systems are different then the one used in the US; the GOVERNMENT controls capital in these countries, but it is not socialist because the PEOPLE do not control those governments. In order for true socialism, the countries must be democratic in nature. Otherwise, the corporate middle man, or the corporate middle man who controls the government, is still taking advantage of workers' production.

In short, socialism represents all the democratic ideals that we Americans value: hard work with reward, equality, and more importantly prosperity that can never be hindered by a mere handful of people. A socialist then is simply someone who doesn't want his life controlled by a CEO in the same way that most supporters of democracy don't want their lives controlled by a dictator or king.

Here's a reality check for those bloggers who want the Government to respond to their views. The Government will do it on its own terms and in its own turf.

But the likes of bloggers like Gerald Giam don't seem to get it. Responding to the Government's rejection of a proposal asking for official engagement on websites run by bloggers and on online forums, he continued to bark up the wrong tree.

While this may be an over-simplification of the problematic effects of HIPAA, it highlights the basic in-efficiencies.
This strikes a little close to home with me, as I had to go to a doctor with an injured back 8 months ago (workers comp) and I would not sign a waiver stating "There are databases in existence that track what medications are prescribed to you, and we need your permission to access these to better serve you." or something of that nature.
The idea, is to stop the over-prescription of pain meds, and that's a great goal. However, I felt it was an invasion of my privacy. I have multiple medications I take on a daily basis for a sleep disorder and ADD. I'll tell the doc what he needs to know, but this piece of paper is a slap in the face.
"No, we DON'T trust you to tell us the truth" is what it's saying, and I didn't appreciate it. I also didn't recieve care beyond "Ah...you'll be fine. In a few weeks, you'll have no problems." 8 months later, I'm getting ready to contact the insurance company to see if they'll cover further doctor visits, as it's only gotten worse. If they refuse, I'll be seeking legal counsel.

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." Anne Frank

Due to a recent accident, my car has not been available to me, so I walk. Today, I was walking home from Walmart. As I was walking, I came upon a mailbox whose mail was strewn all over the ground and whose doors were knocked off. Being who I am, I picked up the doors a put them back on the mailbox and replaced the mail into it.

As soon as I was done, an old man had yelled from across the street, "What the hell are you doing with my mailbox, boy?"

I relayed to him that I was just fixing the mailbox and returning the mail.

He was an older man, maybe 70 years old. He walked with a limp and a cane. He looked at the ground and looked at his mailbox. "I am sorry if I spoke harshly with you sir. It is hard for me to get around and I have had problems with kids busting up my mailbox. You are the first person that I have met to actually stop and help me. Let me give you something for your trouble."

He promptly removed a $20 bill from his pocket and offered it to me.

I said, "Hi, my name is Daniel. Don't you worry about paying me, I am just doing what is right."

He looked at me with surprise, "You mean to tell me that you are just doing it for the sake of doing it? You are a strange one you, know."

I shook his hand, wished him well, and went about my way.

As I was continuing my journey to my apartment, the experience made me ponder about help and trust, and how it reflects on the American lifestyle. I came to the realization that we, as Americans, have a problem with what exactly is help and trust.

Help, by definition, is to give assistance or be of service, with out the expectation of recognition or reward.

Trust is the belief in the honesty and reliability of others.

But to what standards do we hold these concepts? On the government level, we misuse the word "help." For example, if our government goes to help an oppressed people or correct some wrong in the world, we expect some sort of recognition in the form of payback. We claim to go about fighting for Democracy and Human Rights, but behind us are the vultures of capitalism. Corporations waiting to profit from a people just recovering from the grip of despotism and the horrors of war.

One of the main reasons we "assisted" Iraq is to help ourselves to their Economic Dinner Table. We can see many examples of this in Iraq today:

1 Halliburton

The first name that comes to everyone's mind here is Halliburton. Halliburton's KBR, Inc. division charged government agencies $17.2 billion in Iraq war-related revenue from 2003-2006 alone. This is estimated to comprise a whopping one-fifth of KBR's total revenue for the 2006 fiscal year. The massive payoff is said to have financed the construction and maintenance of military bases, oil field repairs, and various infrastructure rebuilding projects across the war-torn nation. This is just the latest in a long string of military/KBR wartime partnerships, thanks in no small part to Dick Cheney's former role with the parent company.

2 Veritas Capital Fund/ Dyncorp

A private equity fund being the number 2 profiteer in the Iraq war is strange. It would mean that there is a group of investors seeking to profit on the ravages of war torn nations. This cleverly run fund has profitted $1.44 billion through its DynCorp subsidiary. The primary service DynCorp has provided to the war efforts is the training of new Iraqi police forces. Often described as a 'state within a state', the sizable company is headed by Dwight M. Williams, former Chief Security Officer of the upstart U.S. Department of Homeland Security. With this and other close ties to defense agencies, Veritas Capital Fund and DynCorp are well-positioned to capitalize on Iraq even more.

3 Washington Group International

The Washington Group International has parlayed its expertise the repair, restore, and maintenance of high-output oil fields into $931 million in Iraq-related revenue from 2003-2006. The publicly traded 25,000 employee company's other specialties include the building and maintenance of schools, military bases, and municipal utilities, such as watering systems. Some have complained that Washington Group's hefty government payoffs have served primarily to raise its trading price on the New York Stock Exchange. One thing is for sure - with oil prices continuing to rise, there will be no shortage of demand for the oil protection services Washington Group International brings to bear.

4 Environmental Chemical

All war zones eventually becomes cluttered with spent ammunition and broken/abandoned weapons, creating a lucrative niche for any company willing to clean it all up. In Iraq, this duty has fallen into the hands of Environmental Chemical. The privately held Burlingame, California company has stockpiled $878 million by the end of fiscal 2006 for munitions disposal, calling upon its "decade of experience planning and conducting UXO removal, investigation, and certification activities." The company has close ties to several defense agencies and is staffed by graduates of the U.S. Navy's Explosive Ordinance Schools, as well as the U.S. Army's Chemical Schools at Anniston.

5 Aegis

Aegis has done the United Kingdom proud after reeling in a contract to coordinate all of Iraq's private security operations. The Pentagon contract is good for $430 million (incredibly lucrative by any standard) but it has landed Aegis in some hot public relations water. The company's decision to contribute to Iraq war efforts has lead to a rejected membership application from the International Peace Operations Association. According to The Independent, the influential trade organization does not consider Aegis worthy of inclusion in the "peace and stability industry." It remains to be seen whether Aegis will continue to be ostracized for participating in the training of Iraqi security forces.

6 International American Products

Even with all of the blinding innovation and trailblazing advances in military technology, none of it would be very useful without electricity. Running electrical wiring in hostile war zones is dicey business, but International American Products has stuck their neck out and collected a cool $759 million in just 3 years for its efforts. While avoiding enemy fire, their work has become increasingly dangerous - and yet, critically necessary - as Coalition forces struggle rebuild cities, put down warring forces, and stabilize the chaotic nation. Schools, oils wells, and other public infrastructure have relied on IAP for the electricity needed to operate. With Iraq slowly beginning to stabilize, International American Products is holding out hope that its job will eventually become less treacherous.

7 Erinys

London-based Erinys has so far scored $136 million for its effort in securing Iraq's precious oil reserves. Riding the coattails of its considerable mining, petroleum, and construction expertise, the company has already made considerable headway toward this critically important goal. In the space of just 16 months, Erinys successfully trained, equipped, and mobilized an all-Iraqi guard force of nearly 20,000 to protect the nation's oil pipeline from terrorist attack or sabotage. With crude oil prices skyrocketing and no end in sight, Erinys looks to have its hands full for years to come.

8 Fluor

Fluor scored a monster $1.1 billion contract in 2004 to build, service, and manage water/sewage systems in Iraq. The deal is actually a joint venture between Fluor (a 44,800 employee company based on Aliso Viejo) and London's AMEC, PLC and actually encompasses two separate contracts. The first - worth $600 million - obligates Fluor to build a water distribution infrastructure and cleaning system for Iraq's major cities. A second $500 million deal will have the lucrative joint venture performing similar tasks in other, less hostile regions of the country.

9 Perini

Perini (controlled by financier Richard Blum) is one of the more controversial companies to have scored big-time Iraq war money. That's because Blum's wife, Senator Dianne Feinstein, appears to have used her seat on the Military Construction Appropriations subcomittee to steer the $650 million environmental cleanup deal in his favor. This has lead to outrage and cries for conflict of interest investigations among those in the media, as well as Feinstein's peers in Congress. Feinstein has also neglected to comment on this potential conflict of interest. This has lead to what Metroactive.com calls an "omission [that] has called her ethical standards into question."

10 URS

Another widely disparaged, Blum-controlled company that has profited from Iraq is URS Corporation. Long known as one of the nation's major defense contractors, San Francisco-based URS has collected $792 million in environmental cleanup fees in Iraq war zones. As with Perini, both Blum and Feinstein have come under intense scrutiny to answer questions about the apparent conflict of interest inherent in Feinstein helping to secure such an exorbitant government contract for her investment banker husband. Both Blum and Feinstein have refused to produce copies of the ethics commitee's rulings on Perini and URS, leading to considerable suspicion.

11 Armor Holdings

Armor Holdings (now a subsidiary of publicly traded BAE Systems) is one company whose opinion of the Iraq war can't be all that negative. Since combat commenced in 2001, the company's revenue has skyrocketed by a mind-blowing 2,247%, up to $634 million. Armor Holdings' specialty is providing state-of-the-art armor for military vehicles and important personell as they traverse dangerous Iraqi war zones. The civil war between opposing Sunni and Shia and general unrest throughout the country have greatly increased the demand for the company's products.

12 CACI

CACI was called upon by the U.S. government to provide 36 interrogators to Iraq, 10 of which were assigned to Abu Grhraib. While all the details have not yet come to light, it looks like CACI profited from Iraq in the worst possible way. One website notes that a leaked Army investigation implicated CACI employee Stephen Stefanowicz in the abuse of prisoners." Furthermore, the allegations have led the Center for Constitutional Rights to agitate for trying CACI and its affiliates in U.S. courts.

Susan Burke, an attorney working on the case on CCR's behalf, was quoted as saying "We believe that CACI and Titan engaged in a conspiracy to torture and abuse detainees, and did so to make more money."

13 Custer Battles

Custer Battles has the dubious distinction of being the first Iraq war contractor to be found guilty of fraud. In March 2006, a jury ordered Custer to pay damages in excess of $10 million for 37 counts of fraud, including what the judge called "false and fraudulently inflated invoices." While Custer wriggled out of serious penalties on a technicality (the Coalition Provisional Authority is not part of the U.S. Government and therefore crimes against it cannot be tried under U.S. law), the whole ordeal has muddied the company's reputation greatly, possibly beyond repair. It also seems to have opened the floodgates for similar cases of contractor fraud. As of fall 2006, a backlog of 70 fraud cases were pending against Iraq contractors doing all manner of work.
During the trial, a retired Army general testified that the inflated invoice scandal stood out to him as "probably the worst I've ever seen in my 30 years in the Army."

14 Nour USA

Of all the companies on this list, Nour USA might be the only one who actually did not exist until the Iraq war got underway. Since its opportunistic opening, the company has recieved $400 million in Iraq-related contracts, including a gigantic $80 million deal to secure the nation's oil pipelines. Some critics allege the contract was pushed through by Ahmed Chalabi (whom one website calls "Iraq's No. 1 Opportunist.") While Chalabi has denied this allegation, several other bidders on the pipeline contract point out how awfully strange it is for a company with no prior experience to be awarded such a large contract.
Of course, it probably didn't hurt Nour to have William Cohen (former Defense Secretary under Bill Clinton) on board as a company consultant.

This is only a partial list of companies that are carving the Iraqi goose. If we were truly seeking to improve Iraqi freedom, would we not be trying to establish Iraqi businesses to take of Iraqi's needs?

The point of my article is to point out that if we, as Americans, cannot trust our government to establish a democracy in foreign lands, then can we trust our own democracy as well? If we do not help because of moral obligation to our fellow man then we cannot trust our government, we cannot trust our fellow citizens.

Our America has broken an ethical code. The selfless acts of heroes past, from Paul Revere to Lt. General Lewis "Chesty" Puller, were worthless if the ideals that they put themselves at risk are not upheld not only in government, but also by the citizen. It is time that our country needs to redress what the ideals are of a true Democracy, and it is time we start rebuilding trust with the international community. A man with out honor is no man, and a country without honor is country of thieves.

I would like to close with this quote,

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. " Thomas Jefferson

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."
Benjamin Franklin

I was walking out of the local Walmart and saw a family standing in front of their SUV. The SUV was a candy apple red, and upon it was all the symbols of a good American. On his rear view window is a decal stating, "God Bless America!". On the bumper are three more sticker, "Peace Is Patriotic," "These Colors Don't Run," and "Do Not Strike If It Can Be Avoided, But Never Hit Softly." In the front passenger window was little plastic pole with an American flag fluttering in the breeze.

Apparently, the man and woman were having issues because because of the way they were addressing each other, but I paid it no mind. People have disagreements, is it the nature of humanity and the freedom of our society. As I was walking past this commotion, this patriotic individual raised his hand and struck this woman smartly on the face.

I was appalled, I am not the sort of person to raise his fist to a woman out of anger. I found this action horrible. I immediately, dropped my bags and yelled at him to not touch her again.

The gentleman looked back at me, His eyes glaring with hatred. His face was red, his teeth were clinched, and in a loud booming voice said, "Who the hell are you to tell me what to do, @!$%#boy!"

In all actuality, I was shocked. I am not in this type of situation everyday. Not only was he mad at me for interrupting the abuse of his wife. He was trying to instigate me further by remarking on the coloring of my skin. I replied as any good red blooded American would in the face of this type of insult.

I looked him keenly in the eye and said, "Sir, get it straight. I ain't just a @!$%#, I AM A PRAIRIE @!$%#, and an American. I am asking you to not disrespect my country by hitting your wife in front of my flag. I respect it too much for that.!"

First of all, for those who do not know, a prairie @!$%# is a derogatory name given to Native Americans. In all fairness, I am against all sorts of abuses, but one does not make peace by passing judgments. As soon as I said those words, he looked around and saw the commotion that was developing.

Then a police car appeared on the scene. The officer walked up to the gentleman and talked to him and his wife. Then walked over and talked to me.

"So, you have been causing trouble here huh? Interfering with an argument they were having? How would you like me to arrest you for disturbing the peace? You better leave before I decide to run you in."

I was dumbfounded. What was going on here? Was I not doing the right thing by trying to stop an act of abuse? So I decided to leave. Unfortunately, the bags with the items I purchased had disappeared. I felt ashamed, embarrassed, stupid, and all sorts of other confusion. This is not how it was supposed to be. I was doing the right thing, yet it was I who was being threatened with the penalty.

Going home let me reflect on the actions of the day. Would it have been better if I did nothing? Should I have done something more? Maybe this is a southern thing, being new to the south, I did not understand?

The more I thought, the more I remembered the bumper stickers on his car. They spoke of peace and patriotism. They spoke of bravery and pride. Apparently this man thought of himself as a patriot, But what is a patriot?

I believe the experience that I had is actually similar to the problems we have in America today. There is lots of flag waving, political rhetoric about how great our country is, and support for questionable leadership.

Some people believe that a patriot always supports the doctrine of government officials. Some believe that a patriot is someone who only sees our country under a favorable light. Others go even further to say that a patriot is someone who recognizes that GOD's will is what is sovereign in the decisions our leaders make.

I must say if you fall into these categories, then you are not a patriot. A patriot is someone who loves his country but loves its people more. A patriot believes in his country and his government but will stand up against injustice against its people. A patriot thinks not of himself but of his people and is willing to put himself on the line for those ideals and to better society.

A patriot is one who understands his responsibilities as a Citizen. That means he must exercise their right of citizenship by watching, reading and listening to news and information that will prepare them to cast an informed, responsible vote at every election, local, state and national.

Another part of that exercise is to provide guidance to your children on civics, government, culture, society and history, all of which help to define that family's character. Children must be taught to be Citizens by their parents.

Citizens of the United States may have a great many rights that give them freedoms we all hold dear: The freedom of independent thought; to voice those opinions, individually to their elected representatives or collectively in small or large groups; to worship as they so choose; to be safe from unreasonable searches of their persons, their homes, or their private papers.

However, the theory of democracy holds that along with these rights come responsibilities: to obey the laws; to pay legally imposed taxes; to serve on juries when called to do so; to be informed about issues and candidates; and to exercise the right to vote that has been won for so many through the toil and tears of their predecessors.

Raising our children to not only appreciate the freedoms, but to defend the rights we value is another aspect of Citizenship and Patriotism. Anyone who works to make the USA a better nation is a patriot! But if that same person does not vote by casting an INFORMED VOTE, that citizen has failed the test of Patriotism!

When we think of patriots, we think of our forefathers. People like Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington were willing to give their love, their liberty, and their life for the sake of the establishment. Too often, I hear the excuse that they were great men living in a very tumultuous time, but they are not like me. I am only an average citizen, making an average wage, doing average work.

Understand this, a great man never recognizes his own greatness. Whether it is a great patriot, a great athlete or a great scientist, greatness dictates that we strive for an ideal that may never be achievable. Do you think when people went to talk to George Washington, he came across as a "great man?" Our founding fathers did not look to each other for this ideal of greatness, but they agreed on what was a great ideal.

There is not one man that can be said to embody the ideal American. There is not one single individual that can be pointed to and say he is the "American Ideal." Why? Because we are all Americans. Whether you were born in a log cabin in the Ozarks, raised on the streets of New York City, or even immigrated here from a foreign land, we are all Americans. AMERICA is not a country, AMERICA is not a boundary, AMERICA is an idea, a concept, and a creed.

Few people realize that the United States actually has a creed:

"I believe in the United States of America, as a government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign nation of many sovereign states; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established upon those principals of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies (internal and external.)" -William Tyler Page Written 1917, accepted by the United States House of Representatives on April 3, 1918.

Since I started writing, I have found that my ideas of what it means to be an American Citizen have changed. At one time, I believed that being a citizen meant just taking advantage of the freedoms that others have fought for me. I can honestly say, when I believed this, I was not a Citizen, I was a resident.

Now, on a daily basis, I ask myself "What can I do today to make America great?" Whether it be as simple as exercising my freedom of speech, making an intelligent vote in an election or as inconvenient as speaking out when I see a woman get hit by her husband, I can comfortably say that I am doing something to help make America great.

"As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence. "
Benjamin Franklin

Using Behavior Modification and Operant Conditioning to Change the Conduct of Our Elected Representatives.

Another election will soon be upon us. When January rolls around, there will be fresh faces in the halls of congress and in our state houses. It is about this time of year that many constituents will face a renewed sense of impotence, irrelevance, and helplessness. One by one, they entered the ballot booth to make their voices heard and do their duty as citizens. In the cold, dreary days of late January and February, they begin to realize that their voices are mute. Legislators will insult the intelligence of their constituents with a new round of spin even as congressional ears turn to do the bidding of the muses representing industry, special interest, and their wealthiest supporters. New promises are broken. Obvious conflicts of interest will surface. Citizens will discover new questionable relationships. New lies will be told. The average constituent will become an after-thought and the familiar stench of betrayal will hang in the air.

We have always known that we can impeach our President or our Governor if misconduct of one form or another is provable. It is very difficult for average citizens to get an impeachment rolling, despite a majority of the opposing party in congress. The two-party system limits us even further concerning the impeachment of a President or Governor with whom we are quite unhappy. We must remember, however, that our President and Governors are members of the executive branch of government. Our legislative branch at both state and federal levels creates the majority of our problems. The legislative branch makes, rescinds and reforms the law of the state or the Law of the Land. It is their sworn responsibility to do so with the interests of all their constituents as the foremost consideration driving their decision-making process. We need to look to our elected representatives to our state and federal congressional bodies for accountability.

We are facing one of the most economically challenging times in the history of our country. We know that our representatives, locally, statewide and federally, have exhibited a gross neglect of ethical behavior as we have seen special interests, big oil, big business, and big money purchase influence. Corporatism is taking over our country. If we have not yet descended completely into a Plutocracy - Kleptocracy, indeed, we are getting close. We have become aware of nepotism, cronyism, misappropriation of our taxes, fraud, bribery, illicit gifts, conflicts of interest, bid rigging, political favors and malfeasance, in general.

The big question is "What, if anything, can the citizens do about this?" Do we have any means of recourse? How do we fire an elected representative who is no longer working for us? They have led us to believe we cannot intervene now, but is that the truth? Have we sentenced ourselves to staring at their backs for the duration of their term, at which point they will make a grand gesture of turning toward us with a broad smile to tell us of their devotion to our wellbeing?

Unfortunately, we have very little recourse in giving the boot to our federal legislative representatives. The Constitution does not clearly state that congressional members are "Officers of the United States." The House of Representatives did impeach a senator once, the senate promptly dismissed charges saying they had no jurisdiction to try the senator and the House has never tested the waters a second time is regard to a member of congress. Leaving removal from office of a congressional member in the hands of congress is rather like putting the fox in charge of the hen house, at any rate. The inability of constituents to remove their representatives to congress perpetuates the illusion of elected officials as "the untouchables" and encourages further misconduct. Our officials are in need of some intensive behavior modification and the sooner the better. The ballot box is only a predictable, occasional threat. The recall can be a constant, unpredictable threat. The recall is potentially far more powerful at changing behavior than the voting booth. We need to teach our officials that inappropriate, unethical behavior will have unpleasant consequences. In order to do this, ordinary citizens need to form a united front to demand the right to dismiss those who are not serving our interests, not doing their job and not conducting themselves ethically. We must demand an amendment that puts disciplining of errant legislators in the hands of their constituents by way of the recall.

We must regain our rightful place as the taskmasters of our elected representatives. An epidemic of recalls would get the attention of congress and send a very clear statement that the constituents are holding the reins now. The recall would level the playing field, assigning more power over representatives between elections to the people. It would help to undermine the influence of those with the power that money brings.

_________________________________________________________________________—

Also see:

• An Initiative To Restore Accountability To Federal Government
• The Voting Issue in America? Call for a Referendum!
• Political Monopoly Power

"There is a limit to the application of democratic methods. You can inquire of all the passengers as to what type of car they like to ride in, but it is impossible to question them as to whether to apply the brakes when the train is at full speed and accident threatens. "-- Leon Trotsky

Growing up, we have all heard the political rhetoric. Communism is not Free, Socialism is not good business, and Democracy is not free until everyone can participate in Democracy, but what do these terms really mean? What does Capitalism have to do with any of these ideals?

I am writing this series of articles so that we can all know what exactly what is being talked about.

Communism: 1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. 2. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

Christian Communism is a theological and political historical theory that is based upon Acts 2:44-45:

44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common;

45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Communism, we have been taught it is a nasty 9 letter word. Whenever we hear it we have pictures of bread lines, meager housing, and dirty living. In fact, we, as Americans, often find the term Communism and Socialism interchangeable. In truth the difference between the two ideology can be summed up in this way:

Communism is effort or production from each citizen according to their ability, to each citizen according to their needs.

Socialism is effort or production from each citizen according to his ability, given to each citizen according to his deeds.

In true Communism, there is no distinction between races, classes, intelligence, ability or disability. In true Communism, everyone prospers based on the merits of society as a whole. So even if you are not able to be a star athlete, a celebrated scientist, or an extraordinary writer, you would still have the same benefits. Whether is be monetary, property, or skill, all would have access in accordance to any needs that arise. There would be no discrimination because you cannot afford medication. There would be no discrimination based on you merit or ability to perform.

In a true Communistic society, "need" would actually come before law. The equity in this type of society favors those who are most in need: children, the elderly, people with physical and mental handicaps.

People that have influence over others, people who have monetary power, or intellectual prowess are given the same auspices as the common individual. That is not to say that these people would be stripped of anything they may have accomplished, or earned in some way. They just are not recognized past the status of citizen.

The ideology actually puts the needs of the state below the needs of the individual. In a communistic government, each person is given the responsibility to represent themselves. The concept of a political or social union would be allowed, but these unions would ensure the representation of the majority on a whole. The system of government would truly recognize the right of all to have a say in the political governing of the nation by how they govern themselves.

True Communism is ordered toward the individual good. Needs have priority over and define rights. So each person would have their say to what there greatest needs are. When we define our needs what do we relate?

Some people would say that their intellectual needs are the greatest. In that case, these people would have excellent schooling benefits at the expense of physical needs. Instead of a private apartment, one might live in a communal group home setting. Instead of a sports car, one might end up sharing the public transportation system. The danger is that because someone would choose to have their intellectual needs taken car of first would go without if they had chosen a house, or a sports car. People who chose this would live simply, they would have a relatively low consumption of social resources and consumer goods. Ultimately, they would also reap these benefits because by improving themselves in this manner would improve society in general, and Communism would reward them by placing them in higher positions, more responsibility, and greater recognition in the society that they are improving.

Those who choose food, clothing and shelter as their greatest need may end up living in their own house, but working only a manual job as their contribution in society. They would not have the ability to improve their lives much, due to the fact that their needs are purely physical encompassing merely the reality of existence.

The tension that results in a communistic society would be between the intellectual citizens, the average citizen, and the technocrats. A technocrat is an expert who is a member of a highly skilled elite group. They tend not to be those who contribute directly to the intellectual or sociological improvement, but would be the middle managers that keep the order of government. They would recognize themselves as the proponents of the establishment, keeping the ideology of the government working. Due to the nature of humanity, they would also avail themselves a segregation as a political power as well, due to pride.

They tend to be the ones who want to be recognized by what they accumulate, but at the expense of the lower working class, but not at the expense of the intellectual citizenry. These types of people derive their sense of merit based upon power over others, the expense of the things they own, and it gives them an elitist feeling of accomplishment of class. This would lead to turmoil ideology, dissent in government, and ultimately revolution.

I have found that in a perfect world, a world where a man has pride on the merits created by his own two hands, this type of government would be ideal. As long as man strives to get more then his brother, wishes to exclude those less fortunate then himself, and thrive on the hunger for power, these type of ideals will never succeed.

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. " Thomas Jefferson

I am not promoting a specific Ideology but for further information the following links:

is the famous (or infamous) Communist Manifesto:
http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

Communist Party USA
http://www.cpusa.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA

World Communist Movement
http://www.broadleft.org/communis.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Communism

And the Fathers of Communism:

Karl Marx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/marx.html

Friedrich Engels
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engels
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/TUengels.htm

Leon Trotsky
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky
http://www.fbuch.com/leon.htm

Vladimir Lenin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin
http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/

Mao Zedong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong
http://www.ccds.charlotte.nc.us/History/China/03/van/vandemerwe.htm

Not understanding the world of high finance i have been asking questions and trying to learn...in order to understand in a simple way why bush pushed the fear and panic button...about the colossal impending doom to our financial system and that of the rest of the world...bush ask …

Forty-two renowned British writers have joined forces to attack the Government over its plans to allow the detention of terror suspects without charge for up to 42 days - on the eve of a crucial vote on the issue.

"In key moments, the president was not there at the meetings where [administration members] were confronting the reality that they had a strategy that was not working," says Woodward.

More Articles

An excerpt from some of my writings on my personal web-space; it seemed to fit the feelings of despair permeating Newsvine at this moment in time.

If there is one major aspect of the human condition which has occupied more of my contemplative energy than any other it is the incredibly selfish nature of the vast majority of the people on the planet. Don't get me wrong, I know some wonderful people, selfless and thoughtful. I also know a whole lot more who are absolutely incapable of exhibiting a shred of empathy for anyone who is unfortunate enough to get in their way.
These folk think that the world came into existence for the sole purpose of serving their personal needs and darkest whims exclusively. The worst of it is that it is these negative traits are just those that we seem to look for, and even admire, in those we choose to lead us.
A constant source of bewilderment to this simply arranged mind of mine is the apparent fact that a single human being, usually male (barring one or two historical exceptions) can lead an entire nation down the stony road to war with a neighbouring nation, resulting in death, destruction and misery for the home side. This can happen if the leader of the home side merely dislikes the leader of the away side. Why not take a leaf from Holly Johnson's book (FGTH) and put the two antagonists in a ring with a pair of gloves.
On the home front, our leaders are constantly searching for ways to erode our treasured rights of freedom; freedom of travel - freedom of speech, even freedom of affiliation, all under the guise of a sincere wish to protect us from harm; harm from ourselves, harm from terrorism, even harm from bad government when the self proclaimed saviours are those in opposition to the currently elected bad guys.
So it goes, from the big man on the hill all the way down to the village simpleton.
In the end all that remains is betrayal.
Human beings have a great capacity for betrayal.

Is the Human spirit quantifiable?

The prohibition of fast food based upon the per capita income in particular areas of L.A.

It is difficult to know how to process the idea that a presidential candidate can fill a stadium to the same capacity as a rock star. But think about it, how does a rocker become a rock star? It's all about the music.

This video and the following quote made me think while watching it. I've always kicked certain things around in my head concerning 9/11 and possible scenario's that could have occurred.

LINK TO VIDEO

Naturally, the common people dont want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.

Hermann Goering, Hitlers Reich-Marshall at the Nuremburg Trials after WWII

This is a quote, as it says, of what one of Hitler's top muckety-mucks said at the War Crimes Trials in Nuremburg. For those who don't know, Goering was to be Hitler's replacement, and was CINC (Commander in Chief) of the Luftwaffe, or Germany's Air Force.

Now, this makes one think, as long as one has the ability to look outside of what they're being spoon-fed. I believe, with all of my heart, that there are men (and women) out there who will stop at NOTHING to attain power, or keep the power that they currently have in their possession. This can lead to some rather desperate acts, as well. Refer to the following article for more on the psychology of this type of individual. Click here for the link..

It bothers me that after 9/11 the country was united under G.W. Bush in a way that it has not been united since WWII, and Pearl Harbor. What was the first thing accomplished? The Patriot Act passed both Houses of the legislature with blinding speed, and no-one really the wiser for it...except a few. We went into Afghanistan, which was legal under the Constitution, but the right turn into Iraq, unless I'm much mistaken, was not justified whatsoever. No WMD's found, no links to WMD's or state sponsored terrorism, and no declaration of War on Iraq from Congress. There was something from the U.N. akin to that, but the U.N. is not provided for within the Constitution as an organization that can send America to war.

There follows a list of travesties that all bother me...Patriot Act, bombing of most of Iraq's infrastructure, American funds to rebuild said infrastructure (with gross abuses of payments to contractors), and all the while the Iraqui government has a large amount of money sitting in the country's banks, unused. This about the Iraqui financial statistic is a statement made to me by one of Senator Warner's aides in a discussion with him several months ago about the Senator's stand on Iraq and the re-building. To what purpose were all these acts committed? Who knows...who cares...are they even cohesive acts? I dunno. But if you read my other articles, you'll notice that I see a distinctly negative trend that is taking America away from the original ideals upon which it was founded.

America has been played and manipulated. This happens when the general public is un-informed. Again, I'll refer you to the simple analogy of wolves at the door. I don't know if it's too late. I don't know if anything can be done to reverse the harm that has been done on a global scale to America's reputation. God knows, I hope so. When I see Congressmen like Ron Paul, I have hope, though. He seems to care about more than himself. He seems to want AMERICA to do well, rather than his own affairs. I would like to see more politicians act in this manner.

Know your enemy, folks. Know yourselves. Above all...Know the game that you're playing, and the rules that go with it, so that you may play it better than the other guy.

"Am I my brother's keeper?" is the question that Cain asked before he was cast out for killing his brother Abel over a petty argument. I hear an argument very much akin to this question in the debate of Healthcare Reform today when it is suggested that the government be involved in providing healthcare for American citizens. Currently, America has the most expensive healthcare system in the world, and does not offer a level of quality that would justify the expense. Among six countries studied for various aspects of their healthcare system, America was last or next to last in all categories, and was the only country that did not have access to universal healthcare. From this information, one could infer that healthcare, and the care of your fellow man, should not be a for-profit industry, instead falling under the purview of the government as a basic civil right.

If opponents of nationalized healthcare of all types are to be believed, then the government does not belong in healthcare, or other areas, as that would inhibit the basic freedoms that an individual holds. This is a valid argument, to an extent, but it has become more a question of which situation will cause more damage to the average person. With premiums for health insurance rising, and the number of things that a policy will cover decreasing, (not to mention the qualifiers put on which prescriptions are covered, what one has to do to qualify for a particular prescription, as well as the price of medicine going through the roof), I feel that it is more difficult for the average person to continue to pay some of these costs, and my personal finances along with many others that I know will evince this belief. I truly believe that the government should be involved in how an individual lives their day to day life as little as possible, but there are also certain responsibilities the government is set forth to provide to allow citizens to live the fullest life possible. It is high time healthcare becomes one of these issues.

One of the most common arguments I hear against nationalizing healthcare is that to do so would increase taxes, and that many feel it would be unfair to have to pay into a program that would provide medical care to others. This is very much like the situation referred to in the opening paragraph with Cain and Abel. Were this argument to be analyzed, it would boil down to one individual considering himself or herself to be more important than anyone else, and showing no thought to anyone but his or herself. This
goes against the grain of any moral and/or ethical teaching that I have ever seen. Without going into too much detail and opening an entirely separate topic of discussion, if one were to use the Bible as a guideline for creating their personal ethical code, then looking at the Parables of Jesus in particular there are multiple instances when Jesus points out that it is better to help others than to help one's self. Throughout the Bible, there are stories that imply that the good of the masses is more important than any individual.

To take the debate further, under the Declaration of Independence, three inalienable rights are listed as inherent to the human condition: "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". To continue in the same situation as exists today in healthcare takes away the ability to "pursue happiness" when an individual is unable to pay for treatment. I work with a lady who has a 12-year-old with a severely debilitating disease and constantly has to see specialists at UVA Hospital. Over the course of this child's life, her parents have incurred close to $1 million in debt, AFTER insurance payments, forcing them to file bankruptcy and lose their house and any other assets they may have owned and they are still incurring bills that they find difficult to pay today because of the sheer amount of money required to care for her. They are unable to receive any Federal Aid whatsoever; because their yearly income falls above whatever line has been determined as the cutoff point for Medicaid benefits. Unable to do anything about these bills, they are subject to judgments, garnishments, and various other forms of debt collection until their daughter turns 18, at which point she will qualify for Medicaid. This medical burden requires that they work overtime, and spend all their time simply trying to find ways to stay afloat, and is becoming all too common an occurrence. When an individual's ability to pursue the happiness referenced above is compromised, then it is time to step in and take action to prevent further injustice.

Until the population as a whole acknowledges that rising costs, and a lack of regulation, are all allowing the healthcare industry to spin out of control then it will become more and more difficult for the average person to receive care. Many want to portray this healthcare dilemma as a financial decision, based upon principles such as capitalism, but I disagree. This is entirely a moral dilemma, and until this is recognized and treated as such I'm not sure anything will get better. Government intervention is necessary, though, in order to prevent atrocities such as being turned down for care because a business feels they can make more profit by accepting patient B over patient A due to needing two different types of care. This situation occurs today in care facilities across the country and is saddening, but true nonetheless. When the decision is made to accept one patient over another simply because the care facility can bill more expensive services to that patient's insurance, then something is wrong. The government was originally put in place to provide services to its citizens, and the private business sector is in place to make a profit, and it's time that Healthcare is moved from one sector to the other.

Kind of tired of people pushing this message of government being the ultimate evil, this tyrant this awful thing. Well, I'm fairly sure that I like government far less than most of the people denouncing it. I'm fairly sure because I believe quite strongly that I am responsible for any organization of which I am a part, and I find nearly all aspects of my government, as I've seen it my entire adult life, morally repugnant. So, small government people, you should know that I dislike our government at least as much as you do. But government is not the ultimate evil. Government is a necessity, even "big" government is a necessity.

Why might that be? Because as bad as our government is, human civilization is worse. Government is this compromise that no one really likes when it's working right. Humans have the ability to be very great and noble creatures. But, untrained, undisciplined, uneducated and disrespected we are the most abominable species out there. Even trained, disciplined, and educated we can be awful. For example, consider the era of time following the invention of writing, also know as the historic era. Not only have we undertaken several hundred genocides, exterminated millions of species and put the world on the brink of destruction, but now, as an "enlightened" civilization, we've come up with reasons to excuse all of those things. Would that I were a cat.

But I still have hope that we can be a respectable species. We can do it! But we can't do it without working together. We can't do it without imposing restrictions upon ourselves. And we can't do it without recognizing that our very actions as a civilization and our very methods of working together take away what is rightfully other people's. When you take part in civilization you implicitly deny others the right not to take part. You implicitly relegate many people to a life that they cannot live happily. And you don't have, we don't have the right. But we're going to do it anyway and we are responsible for every person who is marginalized by society, every single one.

As far as I'm concerned, all of the above, working together, imposing restrictions upon ourselves, educating, training, disciplining and taking care of those who are marginalized are the duties and responsibilities of Government. Government is a central institution that codifies and enforces rules. And there is no method other than a government that has successfully achieved these things in any way whatsoever. Why might this be? Well, governments are a natural thing that humans create and they are the only thing able to accomplish the task above.

So, when someone rights something like "If I Have A Right to Housing, Then You Have a Duty To Provide It To Me" I say, absolutely! In fact, I'll go one further, If I am left outside while you are inside, then you have a duty to find me shelter..

The primary difference between my perspective and the Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalist perspective, is this one little observation. Earth is not an open system. We have rights, we have responsibilities, but we've only got so many coconuts. And this very fact, that we've got a limited amount of coconuts, means that responsibilities out weigh rights. We don't have to do very much before we start effecting our neighbors. We don't have to do much before we start effecting people on the other side of the world. So, while we need to defend our rights diligently, this should be second on our agenda, behind our responsibilities.

The flip side to this is that, every individual has a duty to take part in the government. If Responsibility is the number one goal of government then it must also be the number one goal of citizenship.

11 score and 12 years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. How did our forefathers create the framework that started the basis for our form government? Why is it so important that we fight for such an extreme separation of church and state? More importantly, when our founding fathers constructed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, did they consider the rights of those who did not have faith in any almighty god?

All to often, we see the founding principles of our great nation under attack. People are taking the Ten Commandments out of the Judicial centers. Even mentioning the concept of creationism in public schools is considered a "radical" educational approach. What is the underlying current that has so many people in an uproar? What is wrong with religious views being manifested in government?

I believe it is one thing, RESPONSIBILITY. Our great nation was founded on religious principles not unique to Christianity, AND the right to worship (or not worship) any god, whom we see fit. The scientists and evolutionists, Christians, Jews and Muslims, atheists and agnostic, are ALL free to have their own beliefs.

In the fervor for separation of church and state, we are losing sight of why the founding fathers found it necessary in the first place. The issue of the separation of church and state centered on monarchs who ruled in the secular sphere but encroached on the Church's rule of the spiritual sphere, and the church's attempt at political influence in the affairs of man. This unresolved contradiction in ultimate control of the Church vs. Monarchy led to power struggles and crises of leadership. It even went so far as to have political leaders create churches of their own to reclaim some of the power over the people that the church held.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

Our founding fathers held various beliefs about G-D and man that were debated on, but they did recognize the need for a higher moral standard to act as a guideline to base our nations founding principles on. In truth, there are more than 10 Commandments that were given "officially" in the bible. I never fully understood why we only focus on the 10, but I am about to do some whittlin'.

Of the 10 "official" commandments, 4 have to do with the relationship between G-D and man, and the other 6 have to do with the relationship man has with himself. It is these last five that I feel are most important in regards to our government:

Honor your father and your mother
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
You shall not covet your neighbour's house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.

I believe that his is the baseline for our founding principles. By saying that they are religious is muddling a very crucial issue. Saying they are religious is disrespecting the founders of our great country.

Our forefathers, themselves, had problems with keeping within the ideals of these principles. It is said that Thomas Jefferson and Sally Heming had a romantic relationship. Alexander Hamilton died from a bullet during a duel with Aaron Burr. In regards to these, and many other instances, did our founding fathers believe themselves above accountability to these ideals? Did, at anytime, they think that because they wrote the frame work of the constitution that they were above being accountable to the constitution? I cannot answer that question, but my opinion is that they did not.

In this day and age, I feel that once individuals become judges, win a seats in the House of Representatives, or even the Presidency, they act as if they are above the law. That the law is for the common man, and they may have become "royalty" by voter mandate.

I am not saying that we should teach that there is or is not a god in public schools. I am saying that we do need to teach only factual, proven, information, like the theory of evolution is still just a theory, that 2+2 does equal 4, and the founding principles of our government are based on a belief of a higher moral authority that our founding fathers had. Those principles a government should protect and enforce. It is those principles that we should hold our leaders accountable to today.

We work with a political system where dishonesty and secrecy has dishonored our founding fathers. We work in a society where truth no longer seems to matter, but what ever has the greatest publicity does. We work in a democracy where the politician does not seem to be accountable to the average citizen, but only to powerful multinational, multimedia, conglomerates. How would are politicians hold up to the 5 basic principles afore mentioned? How can we Americans hold our "representatives" accountable for misrepresentation?

Ultimately, my question is what is wrong with the 10 commandments in the court room, school house, or congress? My hope is that someone would look upon them one day, be reminded what this great nation stands for, and maybe change his mind before proceeding.

And you do not need to be a Christian to believe that.

It is, perhaps, a dangerous thing to write an article exploring the boundaries of credibility and legitimacy on a topic such as this, which seems to cause passions to run high and causes some folks to lose their natural sense of skepticism, especially after recent events on Newsvine have people leery of whether the sources of their information are credible. I would be among the last on Newsvine to attempt to legitimize President George W. Bush's over-reaching of the Constitution, such as it stands. However, I also do not believe in hysteria or hyperbole, and view rank credulity with distaste. As a result, I have chosen to push the envelope in order to illustrate a point, and picked this perhaps marginally conspiratorial subject as the venue to make that point.

What is that point?

That it is often unwise to believe everything you hear, or even half of what you see.

Those of you who read my recent article, My Exploration of FEMA Internment Camp #1 in Columbus, Ohio, and who are at all familiar with me or my writings, may have wondered that I so readily signed on to the theories of people or groups which are convinced that George Bush intends to declare martial law and imprison dissidents. I can only say that the devil is in the details. Some of you noticed that the story itself was tagged as "satire," although not announced as such. Still others may have clicked through to the Flickr tour, and on perusing the photos there, read the captions that made all clear-- Camp #1 is a construction of my imagination.

Oh, the photos are real enough. Many of them are of Columbus' Juvenile Detention Center. Some additional photos were thrown in for good measure-- a waste treatment plant located along I-71 south, an aerial photograph of my workplace, a truck my friend and I passed on our way to take these photos. It all read plausibly enough, when coupled with a story structured in such a way as to foster your fears and fit in with what many of you already expected to see. That's precisely the point. And because it matched expectations, few people seem to have followed up to verify, despite the link to the actual photos. If they had, they might have found the very first caption of the very first photo stated

This is not really an overhead view of a FEMA internment camp. This is an overhead view of the neighborhood around my office.

The story that prompted me down this path contained photos, as well. Those photos were convincing enough to the uncritical eye, I suppose. An aerial photo of a purported internment camp, a "prisoner train" and "mobile prisons." To eyes that have no experience with these sorts of things (and, really, who among us does have such experience?), they all seem plausible enough, and that's enough to tip the scales in favor of belief, for many.

But the aerial photo of the camp could be a photograph of anywhere, just as mine was a photograph of an industrial park. The "prisoner train" is nothing more than a rail car for transporting automobiles, as some already suspected, just as my "crematoria" are nothing more than a waste treatment plant. The "mobile prisons" are simply pre-formed construction panels, just as my "internment camp" photos were merely photos which were re-purposed. The map of "internment camps" is simply a map of the criminal justice system's prisons which are operated by Corrections Corp of America.

Does this mean that fears of FEMA Internment Camps are untrue? I'm sure I don't know. They perhaps could be legitimate fears. But they are not supported by evidence as flimsy as this, or evidence as easily "faked."

The human mind is structured in such a way so as to find patterns in everything. Perceptions can be and often are tainted by expectations. This is the danger of the internet-- that we can find what we're looking for, rather than what actually is.

What should you take away from this, then? Well, primarily I would take exactly the words I blockquoted from the first article

As the state of our economy worsens, and being fully aware of the orders contained within both the false Patriot Acts and Executive Directives that make it possible for the President to declare martial law in the event of a financial crisis such as the one we are heading full tilt into, we urge everyone to locate the rest of these facilities, and go and examine them. Once you do, write it up, sneak photos, (don't let them see you taking pictures, or it will cost you), and post them everywhere.

As I said, more prescient words were never spoken. Do what you can to see for yourself. Choose with care the sources which you believe, not because they offer comforting (or frightening) words, but because in your experience those sources are reliable. Where you have the opportunity to confirm or refute an assertion by a modicum of effort and with your own senses, do so.

In a book which touches on a subject that is not identical to this one, but closely related, Kevin Mitnick in The Art of Deception wrote

Most people go on the assumption that they will not be deceived by others, based upon a belief that the probability of being deceived is very low... Now more than ever we must learn to stop wishful thinking and become more aware of the techniques that are being used by those who attempt to attack the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information on our computer systems and networks. We've come to accept the need for defensive driving; it's time to accept and learn the practice of defensive computing.

Whether such deception is an intentional practice or an unintentional side effect of viral memes, I would add that the time has similarly come to practice defensive thinking.

There really was an entry on Google maps for a purported FEMA Internment Camp. It was not at the outskirts of Columbus, but rather more central-- near Franklin park, which if any of you are familiar with Columbus you know is only minutes from downtown. We had a map. We went. We saw. I post the photo for you to the right of this text. Apparently, the men in black intend to vote for Obama. What you should make of that, I'll leave to you. And again, this does not mean that there are NO plans such as those who fear FEMA purport. It merely means that, to the best of my ability, I could not confirm the existence of such a camp within Columbus.

And like me, you should try to see for yourself.

Finally, I want to take a moment to say something about "photographic evidence." Today, photographic evidence is less reliable than it ever has been before. When cameras came out in the mid 1800s, and when they became popular and ubiquitous in the early 20th century, people adopted an attitude about photography that it saw things more truly than even the human eye. The notion was (and is) that the camera captures things invisible to the human eye, or unnoticed by the human mind. This attitude today is somewhat unwarranted and potentially dangerous. Photography is a tool, and as tools go, it is a useful one. But as with any tool, it can be (and has been) abused. It is not a substitute for experience and clear thinking. Whereas 50 years ago the faking of a photograph convincingly might have taken days in a darkroom and an inordinate amount of skill, tools such as Photoshop make the convincing falsification of photographic evidence merely a matter of patience. Cloning, blending, layers, reversion to the original, these tools cut the time, effort and skill required to fake a photograph.

At right, I've posted some photos that I created on a 486 computer using Photoshop 3, roughly ten years ago. Both photos purport to show a murder scene. Neither photo is real. They're careful layerings of manufactured elements with real locations. I don't even claim to be particularly skilled at such fakery. The point I'm trying to make here is that just because you "saw" something in a photograph does not, anymore, automatically mean that what you've seen is real or that it happened.

As Benjamin Franklin advised, believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear.

After a fourteen hour flight from LAX to Shanghai, and a two hour domestic flight, we landed in Beijing in the early morning of Thursday, January 16th. After crashing into bed for the night, we got up early and headed out, met by a flurry of snow, cars, bikes, and pedestrians, some people going to work, many others going to university. Besides the staggering number of bikes, this scene looked little different than any other major city. China, there is no doubt, is a modern nation.

Beijing, the capital of the People's Republic of China, is shaded by many different restaurant and store signs, and large advertisements, almost like a scaled down Time's Square. Audis, Volkswagens, the occasional Mercedes, and Buicks, some old, some new, speed across their wide streets, in and out of traffic, narrowly missing pedestrians. In China, cars have the right a way, and they use it; when making right turns, many people simply honk their horn as if to warn pedestrians they're coming, and to inform them that if they do get hit, well, it is their own fault. New York drivers have nothing on drivers all across China.

Beijing is an odd mix of the old and the new. On one side of the street, you will see advertisements for clothing, electronics or anything else, along with new construction; on the other side of the street, you will see drab, Russian-style buildings, government buildings, with a Red Guard at attention in the entryway. It is a striking contrast; at once, you see the present and future of China, capitalist, quickly moving, modern, and you also see old China, the fabled Red Guard, symbols of Mao's destructive reign.

Beijing is a very surreal place. While seeing so many advertisements, cars and well-dressed people gives Beijing a similar feel to a large Western city, where you are free to do as you please, this sense of freedom is tempered by the starkly different architecture of the government buildings with the Red Guard, which serve to remind you who is really in control.

The people of Beijing do not seem discontented with their one-party government. They are concerned with going to school, or going to work -- with succeeding. They almost ignore it, as if government censorship and limited freedom are merely minor annoyances in their unalterable path toward success. The Chinese people are on a mission, both personal and national.

The tour guides refer to China now as the "new China," one where capitalism is the dominant economic system, and prosperity abounds. They are very proud of their country, both their long history, and their recent ascendancy from Mao's destruction to their current blistering economic growth rate. This enthusiasm is clear in all parts of the city and, indeed, all along Eastern China. The same look of eagerness for the future, for work and success, is on the faces of street peddlers and shop owners, and important business people.

But while this is a new period of economic reform, a free market is certainly not new for the Chinese. China has a long history of, if not free markets, regional specialization and trade. Historically, the Chinese have been quite entrepreneurial, and adept at marketing. This is no more evident than in the old shopping streets of Beijing. These buildings are very old, the streets already narrow filled with thousands of people, but the stores range from upscale clothing stores to old-style tea shops. The smaller shops are trying anything they can to bring people in; many shop owners stand outside with a loudspeaker and beacon people into their shop. Old meets new in these streets, which is a metaphor for Beijing itself; at once China's capital city, home to both the Forbidden City and Summer Palace, and only an hour and a half from the Great Wall, and also one of the main center's of China's economic miracle. There is innovation in the air on these streets, even as history swirls with future.

My family has been admirers of Paul since the 1980's, although to be honest, politics rarely came up in conversation. In fact, it was not until I returned home from college and announced I was a libertarian, that I learned, mouth agape in shock that my parents were as well. As it turns out, my brother was a libertarian, too!

I believe much of it to be a product of my environment growing up. Ours was certainly not a household without rules; indeed my father was the definitive ruler and tyrant. I shudder to think of the many times we butted heads on a variety of issues. As it turns out, the old man was right on pretty much every account.

When it came to the outside world, it was a completely different story. As a young lad I visited upon myself troubles from time to time, and sometimes they were visited upon me. I'd been having a problem at school. I believe I was about twelve, maybe thirteen years of age. Certain boys were bullying me at school. It would range from simple name-calling and exclusion to having my books stolen and hidden, and my personal items stolen. One of my hobbies was drawing. I had spent several weeks on a collection of at least twenty colored pencil drawings. I was especially proud of them, because they were a definite improvement in my art. A classmate saw my folder of drawings and asked to see them. They ended up getting passed around the classroom. My head was in the clouds until they got passed back, and I found someone had taken scissors and cut them all to ribbons.

It wasn't hard to know who did it. It was never difficult. So I went through all the channels. School for a child is much like government is for an adult. I would complain to the teacher, who wouldn't do anything. I would then complain to my parents. They would call the teacher, and request the harassment to stop. When it continued, they moved up the line, contacting the principle, the superintendent, and even the school board. Nothing worked. Children are nothing if not opportunistic and sneaky. It's very difficult for a teacher to catch bullying, and they have even less time to deal with it in the classroom.

So, my father gave me an answer; one that I recognize today as being rather libertarian. He said, "If someone harasses you at school, you have my permission to punch them in the face." He went on to classify the rules by which my combat was permissible. "You must hit them right then and there. You must inform them as to why they are being hit. You may not meet them outside, you may not jump them in the hallway later. You must act then and there and when it is over, you must stop fighting and work to become friends."

Needless to say, the principal was not pleased at my response to his query of "Why did you hit Norman?" when my answer was simply, "He was harassing me, and the school wouldn't do anything about it, so I took care of it myself."

As Prime Premier Lord Principal, this self-defense, self-regulating simply would not do. He quickly called up my father, and informed him in ominous tones, that his son had been involved in fighting! The look of amazement on the principal's face is still etched in my mind as my father informed him that not only was he not upset at my fighting, but he had given them his blessing!

My school rarely expelled students out of school. Instead, we received solitary confinement at the school. Fighting got you two days of hard time, in a small bathroom adjacent to the principal's office that was used by referees when we would have sporting events at our school. They would drag a small chair and metal desk in there, and there I would sit for two entire school days. My homework would be brought to me, and I would dutifully write time served in hash marks upon the painted cinder brick walls.

That year, I spent over forty days in school suspension, in my solitary confinement. My hash marks upon the wall extended far past the most unruly of my classmates. I wish I had learned more about libertarianism back then, but perhaps it is a blessing that I did not. Armed with the full knowledge of self-determination that I have today, I doubtless would have found myself on the outside of a school who believed that students were incapable of thinking for themselves, let alone taking care of themselves, and their property, with just force.

If America is to move forward it needs a vision for the future. As a technologist, naturally a vision to use the new tools to make government and "open Social Network" caught my attention.

Obama's Digital Vision is a revolution when you look close. On the surface it is a remarkable comprehensive 5-point plan.

The Plan

· 1. Ensure the full and free exchange of information among Americans through an open Internet and diverse media outlets.

·2. Create a transparent and connected democracy.

·3. Encourage the deployment of a modern communications infrastructure.

·4. Employ technology and innovation to solve our nation's most pressing problems, including reducing the costs of health care, encouraging the development of new clean energy sources, and improving public safety.

5. Improve America's competitiveness.

The Democrats have always lead in the promotion and actual use of the "Internet", before there was and Internet. We all remember the time wasted on the Gore, "Invented the Internet" foolishness. When you look under the covers of the Digital Vision, it goes way beyond anything out of either parry, or the independent space. All the bullets are important and work together however, the second bullet is the key to the revolution.

When I was in corporate America, I spent a lot of time helping leadership understand a simple reality, "Technology, is to important to be left to the Technologists". I encouraged leadership to elevate technology to a cabinet level position, not reporting to the finance Vice President because you don't know what to do with it and technology seems is expansive. I would say to leaders around the country, really make the Chief Technologist a strategic partner and they will get the tools to the people in the organization who can produce the biggest bang for the Techno-Buck.

The technology industry understood this; the Finance (Banks, Wall Street etc.) industry understood this however, General Business, Non Profits and Government did not. Today Business and the Non Profit community understand the mission critical import, of cabinet level strategic technology integration into the business plan. This is evidenced, by the rise of the CTO (Chief Technology Officer). Government has been behind the curve and failed to use this business tool. Obama is the first to propose fixing this gross error.

Obama envisions a new open democratic government, where citizens have access to relevant government data online. Imagine that, an open government, where citizens can participate in government meetings and provide real-time input to decision making. The current model is, we talk to our "representatives", and they talk to government departments. Imagine, you having all relevant social security information on-line and being part of a social security policy meeting – before the policy is cast in concrete, WoW. That is what I mean by the word, revolution.

Obama plans to put a CTO in place, charged with utilizing technology to open up our democracy, empower our citizens, and get the other points in Digital Vision activated.

Just sit back and think about that for a minute, "Government", as an Open Social Network. Hmm

Go to Obama's website for the details click here.

For more polls, click here.

In the New Book Twise As Good, Rice Disputes Colin Powell's Claim He Had Less Sway with Bush than Rumsfeld Did; 'I've Heard that And I'd Really Like to Know What He Means ... Powell had as Much Access as Anyone'