Definition - #301 - #27 - The necessity of “Definition!”

“What’s the successful alternative to Definition?” .... Is there any?

Suppose you say.....
A “cleric” describes what a martyr should accept as an outcome reward ....(virgins, olive oil....)
A “martyr” accepts the “outcome” and just wants to know “How to get there?”
Does this attempt to define a difference between the two?

Suppose you want to “define” the difference between a Specialist, a Generalist and an Analyst.....
An “Analyst” can become a “Specialist” if he deals with one subject.
An “Analyst” could also become a “Generalist” if he looks at a variety of subjects.
Does this attempt to define a difference between the three?

Suppose you want to define the differences between an “Immigrant” and a legal “Citizen”.......
An “Immigrant” is a person who resides in country but is not subject to all its laws and regulations.
A legal “Citizen” is a person who may reside in the country but IS subject to all its laws and regulations.

Can an “Immigrant” maintain his traditions, customs, language and heritage while still in this country?
Can a legal “Citizen” do the same?
This can be a problem.
Is the purpose to “absorb”, “to melt”? This can be a problem!...... Is it “defined”?

What is the USA trying to do?.... What is the policy?.... Is it “defined”?....... Is it a “Commitment”?.... Who pays the “price” if the policy fails?


Does this describe “The necessity of “Definition!”




P.S. ..... (Possible answers.....)

“I’m simply not interested!”

“People don’t think about this!”

Definition - #301 - #26 - Context” versus “Contacts”

Which is more important ....”Context” or “Contacts”?

Without “Context” we have nothing to pass on.
Without “Contacts” we have no one to pass “it” on!

“Context” will always change. People have a habit of making “context” simple and, regrettably, ... “forgettable! The message will be simplified and, in the process, may be changed slightly. It will be forgotten as the newness wears off. As criticism and alternative views appear, the force of any new idea weakens.

Also, as peer review occurs, “the people” will become aware of “other” similar views.

“Peer” review is supposed to be a review by experts “in our world” from people who are supposedly experienced in the research and acknowledged by the elite of the world renowned experts. Who the hell are they? What can you do about that!!

Who is a “peer”? Who is “the people”? Do you have to be concerned about the answer?.....
Only if the views you present are meant to create change, or, if money is involved!
If social or political change is sought, the original “context or view” is terribly important. What can you do?

Now, what about “Contacts”?
“Contacts” are where you get your background information from.
“Contacts” are the people you are able to talk to, to communicate with, and yes, to blog with!
“Contacts” are the people who make it their business to communicate new ideas and new stories to “the people” in general.... the publishing community, the speaking agents, the media representatives, etc.
Do you write a book, do a blog, make a speech.... ?
Without “Contacts”, the right (powerful and successful) people are simply not there! These decisions cannot be made!

Who or what makes a “FACT”?
Does any book, peer, expert, etc. make a “FACT” so?
Who accumulates these so called “FACT”?.... Archivists? Book collectors (libraries)? The internet?
How can a “new idea or story” be permanent? ... Is this necessary? What if it isn’t “permanent”?

So is “Context” or “Content” more important?
Is it possible you have to have “both”? .... at the same time!!




“Not having any views is a sin!”

Definitons - #301 - #25 – What is a real commitment?

First of all, what might be a definition of a “Commitment”?
Strap on an explosive vest and you have made a “commitment”!

A “commitment” is some action or idea for which you are willing to pay the “ultimate price”!

What does “the ultimate price” mean?.... (After all, you can willingly pursue a course of action without making it a “commitment”! You can quit anytime.)
What makes an “ultimate price”? ....Could it be that you take the “responsibility” for your action or statement? You realize that you could lose something of personal value for this “responsibility”. (Your career, your sense of honesty, your self worth, etc...)

Can you “commit” to something of lesser value? Of course...(diet, savings, job security....)! The greater the value of the “commitment” the greater the personal “price”!
You can change your commitment! You can accept challenges to your commitment. If you change your commitment it doesn’t change “the act of commitment” nor the “price” you accept!

“Advice” should be a “commitment”!
“Analysis” or “Policy” should be a “commitment”!... (It can or need not be a “commitment. It would be nice to know at the time it’s given!
Writing down helps create a “commitment”. (It makes the “commitment” more real, less open to interpretation.)

A person must check as to whether they are issuing a statement or are willing to make a real commitment.
People are looking for real “commitments” rather than political or policy statements.
Are you willing to pay “the ultimate price” for your statements?

Suppose you are wrong? .... Without the assurance of “ultimate payment”, people do not want to hear anything!!

Definition - #301 - #24 – What is really “possible”?

It all depends on what your definition of what “possible” is!!!
Let me try to explain......

If “possible” means that you can overcome a situation no matter what the cost or effort; that means something quite different than overcoming the same situation without decreasing your own present treasure or taxing your own present efforts.
If “possible” means without “cost” a lot of things become “possible”!

So then there is the matter of “cost” again, this depends on your definition of “cost”.
Again, let me try to explain.......

There are all measures of “cost”. Some “costs” are measured in treasure, again that means something different than the “costs” related to effort”.... (hours of physical labor, or the management and hours of effort required to solve anything).
If “costs”, including the amount of treasure and the amount of effort is not a factor; “costs” means nothing.

Who says “It costs too much!”? What are they measuring “too much!” against? What is the measure of “costs”?.......

So, “What is really possible?”.........

The world has plenty of horrendous issues. There’s no need to recount them. They are labeled “horrendous” by different social views. Not all issues are “horrendous” to the same degree. It, again, depends on the labeler!

So, “What are we going to do?”.......

Have I presented so many different options that we become “paralyzed”, unable to act? .......
Is it still possible to simply state what we believe is “horrendous”, and what we believe we are willing to pay in “costs” and effort ..... “What is really possible for us?”

It requires a clear, unequivocal statement from someone we are willing to follow. If we are arguing, debating, and unable to come to a consensus; we must assume that it is not “possible”. Those willing to spend the time and effort to pursue a “possible” outcome can continue to try. Those who wish to turn their heads in another direction, simply turn their heads.

An accurate analysis is not enough!!! ...... We must also be able to “follow” a spokesman into action!.....

Regardless of the obvious dangers involved by not doing something, if we don’t accept and follow to action, the dangers will certainly appear! (paralysis by analysis)

Can we all agree on these conclusions?

Is what we’re really talking about, the difference between “possible” and “practical”?

Is “possible” without sacrifice? And, is “practical” with some acceptable burden?

Do we have anything unless we try to exchange ideas on these differences?
Will we be so adamant in our discussions that we throw ourselves into paralysis?
Should we start to spend more of our time on trying to find a definition most of us agree on?
Should we start to spend more of our time on trying to find agreement in our choice of leadership?
Should we turn more against constant disagreement? (with no “Successful Alternatives”)?

Is meaningless, constant repetition of disagreement, constant repetition of criticism an actual “harm” to us? ......

Again.....

Is what we’re really talking about, the difference between “possible” and “practical”?

Definition - #301 - #23 - New Leadership? Yeah!! But “who” are we going to “lead”?

What’s “leadership” anyway?
If you have no one to “lead”; what’s “leadership”/

So “who” are you going to “lead”?
Is there only one group or are there many?
If there are many groups, which group are you going to “lead”?

Do you expect to “lead” many at one time?
What can you say to “many”?

If you want to address one group at a time, what do you want to say to that group that’s different than what you are going to say to another group? How many “sayings” do you have?

Do you really understand what it takes to be a “leader”?

Perhaps a definition of a real “leader” should be........

A “leader” is a voice or image that most people seem to “understand” and want to emulate... to follow! The content of this communication should be understood and appeal to most people. It should be something they all seem to want. The content is a “policy”; not a specific “how to”. (Most people would have their own way to achieve this “policy” anyhow.)

If the policy is too general or too vague, either most people won’t understand or won’t be interested.
The “content” is what makes a leader!

What general things do I want to achieve?
What “general way” do I propose to achieve these things?

It is the success in presenting this “content” that will make a “leader”!
If you are too vague (We’ll do more!.... We’ll do better!... You’ll have two chickens in every pot! ...etc.) or are too complicated; you will lose your audience!

You will not become a leader!

It is the “mystique of relevance” that makes a leader. It is the way he proposes to present his content.
If it changes group to group; most people will be able to track this. If he offers different things to different groups; most people will be able to track this.
It is in the “message” that one becomes a leader!

So!..... Who are “you” speaking to?
Who do “you” want to lead?

Does the government really create jobs? .... How?
Can we really have a specific, detailed conclusion in Iraq? ..... Is it possible? .... How?

What does the general “leadership” in Washington now think about jobs, the economy, war and peace, terrorist threats worldwide, the real threat to the American way.....

What will a “change” be? What changes in positions are being proposed? What “should” the new Washington positions be?

This is the rhetoric, this is the “content” the people should be hearing.
This should be the basis for a “leadership” decision!

Definitions - #301 - #22 - What does it mean to be a “good corporate citizen”?

Can free enterprise survive?

First let’s take a typical “start-up” corporation. The “risk taker” has an idea for a product. He is willing to risk most of what he’s got, say $5000, and he borrows from parents and friends another $10,000. He and an unpaid friend begin to make this product and sell it in the open marketplace.

The difference in his actual costs and what he receives from the sales is a so-called “profit”.
His actual costs must include at least, say 5% interest, on the $10,000 he borrowed from his parents and friends plus a minimum amount so he and his friend can live and eat.
Now let’s say he gets a new order at his selling price for $100,000. Wow! He needs to hire some extra production and shipping help so he goes to the bank and on the basis of his order and his character the bank loans him an additional $50,000 for four years. His costs have now gone up to include his new production help, and an interest payment of 5% on his original of $10,000, and his new loan which carries and interest on the unpaid balance of 7% and a payment of one fourth the total borrowed amount (or $25,000) to the bank as well as his and his friend’s living costs.

Along comes the government and says he now has to pay an income tax.
Along comes the unions and he has to meet certain wage, hour, pension and health costs.
Along comes the application of certain worker’s benefits including Workman’s Compensation Insurance, disability laws and labor regulations, also included is a mandatory owner’s contribution to Social Security benefits. The costs have gone higher but his sales price stayed the same. He must raise his sales price to equal the increases in costs. Can he still maintain his competitive position with his new sale of $100,000?

Suppose he is able to successfully increase his price to cover his increased costs.
Suppose he shortly is able to get an order for $500,000! He goes back to the bank with his new order and the bank loans him an additional $400,000. Same terms as before!
This new risk taker now has to add to his production and shipping labor, he must now have a full time accountant, he must have a budget for legal counsel, he must now have managerial help...... etc. He is in big business!

Soon his original borrowers want to be paid off with interest and a profit for their “risk taking”. His friend wants more than his “living costs”. The bank wants him to go public so he can collaterize his loans with stock. He, the original “risk taker and inventor” wants some kind of increase in his “living costs” and He wants to build a future for his family.
All these considerations must come out of so-called “profits”.

Query........
What % of the “profit” is the original “risk taker and inventor” entitled to?
What % of the “profit” is his friend entitled to?
What % of the “profit” is “being a good corporate citizen” and satisfying union and worker demands .
Can the company still sell its product at the new price which includes all these demands?

Query.....
If, in order to survive in a free, competitive environment, the company must use labor which is at a lower cost (outsourcing) in order to maintain as much of the company as it can; or, should it fold up and close its doors?
If the owner or his staff or labor ask for an unreasonable payment for services and causes this company to raise its prices above the competitive level and thus fail in the marketplace, who should bear the burden? What are the “reasonable” costs of service? Who determines? What is “free enterprise”?

What does it mean to be a “good corporate citizen”? Who determines a “living wage”?

Who determines the “value” of the contributions made? Is there even a question without the original “invention”?

Is “free enterprise” viable?

Current Events - #201 – #30 - Will changing the political parties change policies?

I don’t think so!

What changes do you think we need?
Has any group said what changes they’re going to make?.... Should we abandon Iraq? What then?
Does the other party have a plan to make the intelligence better? How?
How should we pressure Iran? Exactly how? … What do we leverage with?

Will changing the political parties change policies?
“Let’s reduce the National Debt”!

The existing situation on education (Leave no child behind!) also requires money!
Our current prison system needs to be upgraded. It also requires money.
Our economy is faltering. It requires money, so let’s abandon the tax incentatives and give the money to these causes. But what about the people who say that because of the tax incentatives, we have even more money to spend and the economy is doing better! ….Whose policy should we follow?
Our borders need more protection. This also needs money!
Our soldiers need higher pay and incentatives. This also needs more money!

So, let’s reduce the National Debt!.... But how?.... Since all these complaints (and many more!) require more money, what policy will change all this?
Will merely changing one party for another bring “enlightenment”?
Doesn’t one side or the other have a plan? If so, what are they?

The “thinking people” want to know. The “mob” is not interested or doesn’t care! So what’s the good of an election? What does a “vote” really mean?
Do you really know the person or the parties new plans? ….or do they have any?

This is real serious!
We have in the world people and Nations who do not care about life or death. They do not think about a “No Win War”. They don’t care about the future. As a matter of fact, they really don’t care about their people or the existence of a world. They want to get even!
Will changing the political parties change policies?

Current Events - #201 – #29 – The Welfare State and Katrina

September 5, 2005

Unnatural Disaster: A Hurricane Exposes the Man-Made Disaster of the Welfare State
By Robert Tracinski

It took four long days for state and federal officials to figure out how to deal with the disaster in New Orleans. I can't blame them, because it also took me four long days to figure out what was going on there. The reason is that the events there make no sense if you think that we are confronting a natural disaster.
If this is just a natural disaster, the response for public officials is obvious: you bring in food, water, and doctors; you send transportation to evacuate refugees to temporary shelters; you send engineers to stop the flooding and rebuild the city's infrastructure. For journalists, natural disasters also have a familiar pattern: the heroism of ordinary people pulling together to survive; the hard work and dedication of doctors, nurses, and rescue workers; the steps being taken to clean up and rebuild.
Public officials did not expect that the first thing they would have to do is to send thousands of armed troops in armored vehicle, as if they are suppressing an enemy insurgency. And journalists—myself included—did not expect that the story would not be about rain, wind, and flooding, but about rape, murder, and looting.
But this is not a natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster.
The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel has gotten the story wrong.
The man-made disaster we are now witnessing in New Orleans did not happen over four days last week. It happened over the past four decades. Hurricane Katrina merely exposed it to public view.
The man-made disaster is the welfare state.

For the past few days, I have found the news from New Orleans to be confusing. People were not behaving as you would expect them to behave in an emergency—indeed, they were not behaving as they have behaved in other emergencies. That is what has shocked so many people: they have been saying that this is not what we expect from America.

In fact, it is not even what we expect from a Third World country.
When confronted with a disaster, people usually rise to the occasion. They work together to rescue people in danger, and they spontaneously organize to keep order and solve problems. This is especially true in America. We are an enterprising people, used to relying on our own initiative rather than waiting around for the government to take care of us. I have seen this a hundred times, in small examples (a small town whose main traffic light had gone out, causing ordinary citizens to get out of their cars and serve as impromptu traffic cops, directing cars through the intersection) and large ones (the spontaneous response of New Yorkers to September 11).
So what explains the chaos in New Orleans?

To give you an idea of the magnitude of what is going on, here is a description from a Washington Times story:
"Storm victims are raped and beaten; fights erupt with flying fists, knives and guns; fires are breaking out; corpses litter the streets; and police and rescue helicopters are repeatedly fired on.
"The plea from Mayor C. Ray Nagin came even as National Guardsmen poured in to restore order and stop the looting, carjackings and gunfire....
"Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with shoot-to-kill orders.
"'These troops are...under my orders to restore order in the streets,' she said. 'They have M-16s, and they are locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill and they are more than willing to do so if necessary and I expect they will.'"

The reference to Iraq is eerie. The photo that accompanies this article shows a SWAT team with rifles and armored vests riding on an armored vehicle through trash-strewn streets lined by a rabble of squalid, listless people, one of whom appears to be yelling at them. It looks exactly like a scene from Sadr City in Baghdad.
What explains bands of thugs using a natural disaster as an excuse for an orgy of looting, armed robbery, and rape?

What causes unruly mobs to storm the very buses that have arrived to evacuate them, causing the drivers to speed away, frightened for their lives? What causes people to attack the doctors trying to treat patients at the Superdome?
Why are people responding to natural destruction by causing further destruction? Why are they attacking the people who are trying to help them?

My wife, Sherri, figured it out first, and she figured it out on a sense-of-life level. While watching the coverage one night on Fox News Channel, she told me that she was getting a familiar feeling. She studied architecture at the Illinois Institute of Chicago, which is located in the South Side of Chicago just blocks away from the Robert Taylor Homes, one of the largest high-rise public housing projects in America. "The projects," as they were known, were infamous for uncontrollable crime and irremediable squalor. (They have since, mercifully, been demolished.)

What Sherri was getting from last night's television coverage was a whiff of the sense of life of "the projects." Then the "crawl"—the informational phrases flashed at the bottom of the screen on most news channels—gave some vital statistics to confirm this sense: 75% of the residents of New Orleans had already evacuated before the hurricane, and of those who remained, a large number were from the city's public housing projects. Jack Wakeland then told me that early reports from CNN and Fox indicated that the city had no plan for evacuating all of the prisoners in the city's jails—so they just let many of them loose.

[Update: I have been searching for news reports on this last story, but I have not been able to confirm it. Instead, I have found numerous reports about the collapse of the corrupt and incompetent New Orleans Police Department; see here and here.]

There is no doubt a significant overlap between these two populations--that is, a large number of people in the jails used to live in the housing projects, and vice versa.

There were many decent, innocent people trapped in New Orleans when the deluge hit—but they were trapped alongside large numbers of people from two groups: criminals—and wards of the welfare state, people selected, over decades, for their lack of initiative and self-induced helplessness. The welfare wards were a mass of sheep—on whom the incompetent administration of New Orleans unleashed a pack of wolves.
All of this is related, incidentally, to the incompetence of the city government, which failed to plan for a total evacuation of the city, despite the knowledge that this might be necessary. In a city corrupted by the welfare state, the job of city officials is to ensure the flow of handouts to welfare recipients and patronage to political supporters—not to ensure a lawful, orderly evacuation in case of emergency.
No one has really reported this story, as far as I can tell.

In fact, some are already actively distorting it, blaming President Bush, for example, for failing to personally ensure that the Mayor of New Orleans had drafted an adequate evacuation plan.

The worst example is an execrable piece from the Toronto Globe and Mail, by a supercilious Canadian who blames the chaos on American "individualism." But the truth is precisely the opposite: the chaos was caused by a system that was the exact opposite of individualism.

What Hurricane Katrina exposed was the psychological consequences of the welfare state. What we consider "normal" behavior in an emergency is behavior that is normal for people who have values and take the responsibility to pursue and protect them. People with values respond to a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to overcome the difficulties they face. They don't sit around and complain that the government hasn't taken care of them. And they don't use the chaos of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men.

But what about criminals and welfare parasites? Do they worry about saving their houses and property? They don't, because they don't own anything. Do they worry about what is going to happen to their businesses or how they are going to make a living? They never worried about those things before. Do they worry about crime and looting? But living off of stolen wealth is a way of life for them.
People living in piles of their own trash, while petulantly complaining that other people aren't doing enough to take care of them and then shooting at those who come to rescue them—this is not just a description of the chaos at the Superdome. It is a perfect summary of the 40-year history of the welfare state and its public housing projects.
The welfare state—and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains and encourages—is the man-made disaster that explains the moral ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one is reporting.



Part of “Another Comment”

What Hurricane Katrina exposed was the psychological consequences of the welfare state. What we consider "normal" behavior in an emergency is behavior that is normal for people who have values and take the responsibility to pursue and protect them. People with values respond to a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to overcome the difficulties they face. They don't sit around and complain that the government hasn't taken care of them. They don't use the chaos of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men.

But what about criminals and welfare parasites? Do they worry about saving their houses and property? They don't, because they don't own anything. Do they worry about what is going to happen to their businesses or how they are going to make a living? They never worried about those things before. Do they worry about crime and looting? But living off of stolen wealth is a way of life for them.

The welfare state--and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains and encourages--is the man-made disaster that explains the moral ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one is reporting.

Current Events - 201 - #28 - Opening “Katrina’s Box”!!!!

“Katrina’s Box!” has a whole set of issues that need to be thought about!!

1 – If many (20% to 40%) of the citizen’s of New Orleans are on some kind of Government assistance and (it is estimated that....) over 40% of the children live in “poverty”; what kind of program should be constructed that will “take care of” these people. What is “take care of”? .... What is the meaning of “support”?
Are the taxpayers who are not receiving Government assistance supposed to give money to “support” these people for the rest of their lives? What is “support”? To what degree?
Are the taxpayers supposed to provide “good paying” jobs for these people?
Are the taxpayers supposed to provide permanent “good housing” for these people?
How about “others” along the coast and inland that are also “in need”?

2 – In general, this brings up the question of what the US is supposed to do for those that either are poverty stricken, or, who remain unmotivated and are able to exist under their present circumstances. Nations have tried Communism, Socialism and outright Dictatorship to, at least, “control” the less advantaged. (That is, until the “mob” hits the streets!) This issue of what the “standard of living” by the majority will accept to “assist the less advantaged”, and, to what degree it is willing to provide “assistance”, has been an unspoken problem for our society. How much are you willing to reduce your own, personal standard of living to provide for some “others”?

3 – Will the US, as it stands now, have to change? Will the average standard of living have to decrease to take care of these new “refugees”? (Forget the illegal alien situation....that’s another burden!) This is the unspoken, third rail political situation. Think of the problem the US has in covering its own Social Security problem!..... It’s all a “money” situation. The nation does NOT have an unlimited budget!!!

4 – And what about the “war” situation? How much can our budget bare?

5 – Will the heart of our government speak about these issues?
Will the politicians speak?
Will any one risk the votes that may come from these issues?
Is this still a battle between the “haves” and “have nots”?
Can we afford now to “mumble “ this to death?

6- Do we have the time to think about the environment, gasoline prices, outsourcing, etc, if we have a true limitation to our resources? ...... Maybe we have “unlimited resources”? .... It sure would be nice to know! Should we “all” (including the media and the talking heads) be more concerned about the “Katrina’s Box” situation? ..... Isn’t money still the real issue?


BUT!!!

There is a “flip” side!!!

There are approximately 1,500,000 citizens involved in the Katrina catastrophe. But there are approximately 250,000,000 citizens in the US today. That’s less than 1% for the Katrina total!!!
Only approximately 40% of the so-called “victims” were already on Government aid programs. This was in the US budget, already. The only basically new thing is the government has to build new housing for the 40%. No new “except this “re-building” financial support has to be incurred.

What about jobs for the other 1,000,000 citizens? What about government aid for the 1,000,000 people who lost everything? If you give $10,000 to each one of them it will amount to $10 billion dollars! If you give $100,000 to each of the remaining 1,000,000 that amounts to $100 billion! But the present debt is over $7 trillion. That is 700 times the National debt we owe now! The yearly National debt is already about $400 Billion per year. What’s a $100 billion in 5 or 10 years!!

The politicians, who need the votes, and the media, that needs public opinion, are only concerned with what “looks good”! ..... Financially, all is possible! ..... That’s the “BUT” in all this. ......That’s the “flip side”!

So what’s it gonna’ be??





P.S........
Does the “War on Poverty” strike a bell?
The cry of “Eliminate poverty”!!
The cry that “The “poor” always suffer the most”!!

What’s possible in a Nation that is trying to keep its “standard of living” above the “poverty or third world” level? Can we compete and still “eliminate” poverty? Are these just slogans?
Do you really expect answers.... from anyone?


Just think about it!!
NO, not to find an answer! ... but just find a personal way to live with it.


PS II.......
Just in case you haven’t heard......
Louisiana had a Government approved plan to evacuate New Orleans. This included the 100 plus school buses that are still in the waterlogged parking lot. Their excuse is they could not get drivers for these buses!!
How much did the state of Louisiana get from the Federal government for these “evacuations”? Where did the money go? Why didn’t the Mayor of New Orleans do something BEFORE Katrina hit? He had at least two days....

Current Events - #201 - #27 - What happened to the “wise men”?

Raw intellect and information are NOT enough!
What happened to “informed debate”?

No, not political speeches! Not “analyst’s” reports! Not more “opinions” or commentators’s reflections!

We want more “facts” that are suitable for public discourse (nothing to hurt our “real national security”)!

If an individual can run a company, become a “professional” doctor, lawyer or professor, if he can read or reason; he is becoming less enchanted with the “drivel” he is able to receive. He is becoming more “dropped out”, more “disconnected”, every day. He is giving up the hope that the Constitution and the Legal system can be influenced by his vote or his concern. He is, by this National deficiency, becoming more introverted, more for himself, more “selfish”!

The so-called “intellects” are unknowingly becoming LESS influential, less relevant! The so-called “ordinary citizens” are changing the attitudes, their hopes for the future. Yes.... we are loosing the future!
The so-called “power structure”, the so-called “informed” are losing their audience!
A person (or couple, of course...) that can work, raise a family, prepare for a future must be able to “THINK”!

What we hear from the media is a constant refrain of opinion, some informed, some with “unfounded resources”. The “internet” has become an unfathomable source of invective, distortions and truths. These are all placed in a cauldron of “misunderstanding” and “confusion”! Which or Who do you believe?

We are all looking for guidance! What we are receiving is such a mixture of communication that we are confused. We “drop out”.
We are looking for “Leadership”! People who have the good of the people in mind. We don’t need more
”information” .... we need some people to translate what we are already receiving.... some one(s) we can trust!

There are already too many challenges to the meaning of law and order, too many challenges to the meaning of the Constitution. The basics of the definition of Education, of Standard of Living, of the American way....all need translation by someone(s) we trust!!!!!

The people of America are dividing.... dividing in their interest of their allegiance and support of the American way of life. They are confused by the mass of un-translated communications. We need a “translator” we can trust!

Mere policy, mere unfounded information, mere opinion are things we DON”T need! We don’t need to have someone tell us how to live, what to buy, what to think! Give us a TRANSLATER we can trust so we can make up our own minds. (By the way, we also understand you can’t commit murder or run through a red light!) We realize that Democracy has some restrictions in order to survive!)

What we CAN do is to be a good “translator”, NOT a gossip, NOT just a repeater of misinformation. Individually we must try to reason what are “facts”, what is a reasoned position. We must listen to other opinions and policies and, at least, learn what the “opposition’s point of view is. We must learn to better “communicate”, to define, to honestly debate NOT just argue.

Can you be of HELP?

What happened to “informed debate”?

Current Events - #201 - #25 – So, “we” (the white folks) are now in the minority!

So now what?
(Maybe you don’t want to think about this prospect)

At least in California, the Spanish speaking are in the “new majority”. What can the “previous” majority expect?
The new Spanish speaking majority will try is best to gain political power.... nationally and locally.

History shows us that the minority, once it gains power, it will strongly oppress its own base ... the very same minority. (You see it in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Africa, Sudan, etc.) The new leaders will try to gain power over this “new majority” the way they always have.... through secret police, so-called defense forces, and political maneuvering. This “new majority” must be controlled by someone. History shows that the “controlled new majority” is the source of wealth and power for the leaders of this “new majority”. So it has been and always will be!

The USA is unique in that the so-called present leadership of the old majority has been more subdued in its desires for power and money. The laws that govern the USA have, to a large degree, been a model for its growth. The USA is a new and unique civilization.

Not so for this “new majority”. It is steeped in its old culture. In fact, its old culture has been encouraged unfortunately by too many of the “present intelligentsia” in the hope for good in “cultural differences”.
You reap what you sow!!!

What should the New Minority (the present white folks) do?

It should do what has already been done. It will try to hide. It will try to finance all sides of the “new majority”.... its police force, its army and its politicians. It will try to survive!
But what of the older middle class? It will lose its present standard of living and will become some of the oppressed.... a third worlder.
The USA will no longer be the country it once was! It will be different!

How long are we talking about?

Who knows for sure ..... maybe ten or twenty or fifty years! It’s a slow but sure process.
We will “fiddle” while Rome burns!
(I told you, in the beginning, this may not be what you want to hear!)

Of course the “new majority” can change; but will it?......

Current Events - #201 - #26 - Are we “just satisfied” with the “misdirection”?

The media and the TV “bombard” us with “We can do better...!”, “We ought to bring others to help us!”, “We can do more..! etc. But there is never a “How?”. The producers of these shows try to make it controversial, souped up, loud and aggressive. They give us “good looking” spokespeople who can serve up the producer’s wishes, talk loud and fast and will never include a “How?’.

This is indeed a steady “bombardment”. It does not allow a person time to think! Perhaps this is the reason for this mass “misdirection”!

And yes, this is “misdirection”. This is filling the media experience with such noise and change in subject that the listeners do not have a chance to think about the real “important” issues The listeners, however, do not generally feel they lack important information. They feel “informed”. They do not feel motivated to stop and consider what the really important issues are. “Misdirection” is working! Take the people’s mind off the important issues and fill the air with many issues and make them loud enough and fast enough so the people will not think about selecting the most “important”. They all feel “informed”! They do not feel they need any “real” specific answers....... Gay marriage, Wall Mart discrimination suit, Dope addiction, School money, Welfare, Minimum wage, Medicare, Prescription drugs, etc.; and, oh yes, the war in Iraq and the cost of Homeland security.

What’s really important?
What specific solutions are offered?
Is “We must do more!” or “We must do better!” an answer?...... Where are the specifics?

(If you want to just complain, I guess that’s OK, but it doesn’t lead anywhere. It’s just more loud noise!)

Unfortunately an election is coming up. People must decide who they want to run the country. Is this decision based on “real information” or the steady drone of “misdirection”? How, exactly “How” do they want the country to run? Be specific.... Be truly informed as to the “Successful Alternatives”!
To many, the internet “must be true”....... To others the media must be well informed! Hogwash! Even our government has succumbed to lies and interpretations.
Well then, how do we truly become “informed”?

It’s the old “reason and logic” thinking. Question every source but at least be aware of what other sources think, Then, and only then, can you reasonably make up your mind.

Our Nation is in a crisis.
What is really “important”?
Do you have a Nation if Homeland Security is not possible?
No matter what, can anything else survive if the Nation does not?

Yeh! But what about Gay marriage, Welfare, The National debt, etc.?

Does it really matter if the Nation does not survive!!

Current Events - #201 - #24 -Is it going to be Judeo-Christian ethics, Moslem theocracy, or American Democracy???

It looks like the world will have to decide which one is to survive!
This is a “future” world….fifty years from now!

The birthrate in so-called Europe is so low that there will be less people of younger age in Europe in 20 or 30 years than there will be an the increase in Moslem population throughout the world.
“Europe” will find itself becoming more Moslem. It will probably go to war to protect itself. It won’t be a civil war, it will be another type of conflict. But it will seem a war of “survival”. Survival of a type of “European culture” versus a survival of a so-called “Moslem culture” based on its religion.

Then, of course, “American democracy” and its so-called idea of “culture” will be at war with the surviving cultural battle between “Europe” and the “Moslem” culture or religion.

It looks like “war” is inevitable. As Winston Churchill said “…victory is the only successful result of war!!!”
After all, war is “survival of the fittest” .. the “survival of the strongest”.. the “survival of the most warlike”!

It is great to muse over the “results” of war, but, first and foremost, “victory is the only successful result of war”! Then go ahead and muse on….!!!

Perhaps this subject is giving you a headache!
Perhaps you may not wish to go on? …… Bye now!!! … But for those that wish to think ahead……
Think …Suppose we take a look at what made us think “war was inevitable” in the first place….

1).Birthrate in “so-called Europe” is lowering…. This is a present statistical fact. But why? Is the present generation so “material-survival” conscious that sharing a limited amount of material resource among more people is self defeating? Why is there such a “material” shortage? Could it be that in order to keep “living” easy, the governments have adopted ideas and regulations that encourage less effort and more government subsidy? Therefore, the production of more “material” has become less important than “living the easy life”? To keep the same standards of “living”, less material equals less people to share it with… lower birthrates!

2).If the so-called “standard of material living” is lowered, (i.e. less food, older homes, less maintained roads, schools, less of “material” things….) and there is no negative response, the populace merely acknowledges and will do with less … NO PROBLEM!!! BUT….

If there is an outcry, a discontent, what then? Do we look for someone or something to blame? Do we change our government, our policies, “our living is easy” culture? Do we just declare a war and divert our attentions to “victory is the only successful result in war” and try and figure out what to do “after”? There are choices!


3).Can we look to history for any constructive ideas? Some think America offers nothing to look at. After all, America is new… untested! America has, after all, survived many unique trials and tribulations in its 300 year old history. It’s not 3000 years old but certainly something that has stood a few hundred years has something to look at! America has, after all, achieved at least a “material standard of life” that is being envied by some. America has adopted laws and regulations that has encouraged individual rights and entrepreneurship. It’s not perfect but there is a continuing effort. America may not be everyone’s image of a “good life” (including some Americans themselves) but certainly there is SOMETHING to be studied and considered.

Some think that other cultures have other things to be considered… Religious theocracy, Monarchy, Dictatorship, Anarchy, Tribal rule, etc. All have something to be evaluated! Both good and bad!!! Even if war is not an answer, it will be inevitable unless thinking people once again are a major influence in policy. An intellectual idea is not a replacement for a human being… any human being. Because you possess an idea, a policy, does not necessarily mean that it would work or be successful … “for the greater good”. But war is the result of running out of useful ideas and the ability to communicate them to the majority of the people.

Do we have any real thinkers left?
Are we running out of ideas … ideas for “the greater good” of the people?
Do we have successful communicators?
Is a real “leader” a communicator or a “mighty ruler”? … Is physical force the only answer?

There is nothing in this world we can’t learn something from … good or bad!
Are we learning or don’t we want to be bothered?
Are we leaving the future to “momentum” or are we “thinking”?

“WAR is inevitable if we don’t learn, change and adapt.”


BUT …“Victory is the only successful result in war!”

Current Events - #201 - #20 - Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with a "Peace" plan !

(Hard to argue with this logic!)

“I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan”:

1. The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, Noriega, Milosovich and the rest of those 'good ole boys.' We will never "interfere" again.

2. We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one sneaking through holes in the fence.

3. All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are. France would welcome them.

4. All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5. No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6. The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7. Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go some place else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8. If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9. Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10. All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer.

Now, ain't that a winner of a plan?!

"The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying 'Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses.' She's got a baseball bat and she's yelling, 'You want a piece of me?'"

#101 - #36 - Well, what do you wish for?

It is time to decide what “people” wish for!

Question: Is their any way to decide what “people” wish for?
Can there be a majority of any thing that “people” wish for?

I don’t think so!!!!

As long as anyone or any group thinks there can be a “consensus” of anything, we are doomed to failure!

So, what to do? ........

There are groups that only analyze! There are groups that only criticize! There are groups that think they are powerful enough to direct human behavior, their religion, their way of government, etc. ! There are groups that only want to advocate their opinions!
What about groups that want to explore “successful alternatives”! Where are they? How do you hear from them? (If they just talk about any type of alternatives, they are missing the point! We want “successful alternatives”!)

Do the people have to “hit the streets” as a mob, to change things?
Is there a civilized way to address this question of “change”?

To the “few” who don’t need to run for re-election, to the “few” who don’t need the profit motive to do anything, to the very few “few” who think and reason; the challenge remains as to how to get organized and heard before “the mob hits the streets!

The occasional voices of reason are not getting to the people. The “people” are frustrated and are becoming more interested in themselves. That’s a “failure” of the “few” who are trying to bring reason and logic to our nation.
Should the “few” try to come together and organize? Is this possible? Can they then be heard more publicly?

Who will try to bring this group together? Can the various “think tanks” ever try to agree?
Who is willing to publicly challenge a misinformed voice?...... about facts?.... about conclusions, etc.?
Why must there be a “spin” on everything?

Are the “few” trying to determine the basics? Aren’t the “REAL basics” the survival of America and its Constitution?
Does our financial strength determine our ability to have the standard of living we think we enjoy?
Does the law and its restrictions determine the extent of our “democracy”?
Does our peculiar geographical position determine the commodities that we enjoy? (the coal. food, water, etc.)
Are these the “real Basics” we should consider? (Not abortion, Not gay marriage, Not education, Not immigration, etc.)
Are we so misdirected that we are distracted from the “real Basics”?

Do we consider these “Non Basics” in the same “logical and reasonable” way we intend to discuss the other “Real non-spin Basics”. Or do we continue to fill the general public with “spin” and opinions not necessarily based on facts? Do we wait for the inevitable “mob in the streets”?

It’s time to think about this.....

Government - #101 - #35 – “Policy and Concept Ideas”

If we have intellectual ideas that are about our future direction in the National policy, are they in any way in disagreement with the subject of “How to accomplish anything in current affairs?”
If we have two different subjects, how can there be substantial disagreement between the two?

“Globalization” and “Connective ness”, (turning the “Gap” into more of the “Core”) versus eliminating Oil and Energy as a source of tension and turbulence in the world are two ideas........
These words, these concepts and policy discussions should not be a source of disagreement.

The highest degree of intellect has brought these words and concepts to the public’s attention. Shouldn’t these be the areas of our most important concerns. Social security, Gay Marriage, Abortion, Democrat versus Republican ...all mean little if we have no country left!
Where is the world going? .... That’s the important question!

We are, indeed, so lucky that a few of our intellects have taken the time and their thoughts about these worldly issues (even at their own loss of personal fortunes).......
(Fame and notoriety do not sufficiently reward this type of analysis!)

Is the general public so caught up with their personal lives that they shun even the occasional thoughts in these directions. Is the mere fright of not knowing anything about these issues, enough to bury their heads into the sands. Is the excuse of.....“I’m too busy with paying the bills and raising my family to be concerned with these ideas and besides what can I do about them?” .... enough of a reason that they become mere sheep and go wherever their leader tells them?

What is the reason to “VOTE”? ...... Is being a Democrat or Republican enough of a reason? ... I don’t think so!!!

What concerns do the minority of the thinking and reading public have? Are their concerns easily misdirected into Social Security, Gay Marriage, Democrat versus Republican rather than these important “global” concepts? Do they sufficiently realize that these “other” things cannot exist if there is no World, no Nation?

How do you make the general public care?
How do you “re-educate” the majority of people that there are “successful alternatives”?

Do we wait for the masses in the streets to someday create a revolt .... (against what they know not!!!)

What do we do?

Government - #101 - #34 – Suppose we divide the world ......

Suppose we divide the world into three classes.

Class #1 – The rich people who have all their choices of good food and voluntarily go for exercise, outdoors and health.
Class #2 – The majority of people who survive on the food and health services that they either choose or are available. They work and they more than “just survive”.
Class #3 – The poor who work and who have few choices in food or health. They “barely survive”.

We, also, have the divisions called “Majority” and “Minority”.

1 - The “Majority” are those that work and “readily survive”.

2 - We, also, have a “Minority” that either is “rich” (and all that it provides) and the desperately “poor” that “barely survives”.

So we have BOTH types of divisions!!!

We have the “rich” who may choose to work or not.
We have the “majority” who do work.
And, we have the “poor” who must work.

We have people who choose to exercise....
We also have people who must work and do not choose to exercise.

We have people who choose the “right” foods.....
We have people who eat the food that is available.

We have people who are aware of reason and logic......
We also have people who are either unaware of, or, are to busy to use “reason and logic”.

The World has many divisions!!!

Do you think it is reasonable to assume that there is any one idea that applies to all the “divisions”?
Isn’t it “enough” to be an “expert” in one division? Should you even listen to many or all divisions?
Is it possible to ease the burdens of one division without trying to ease the burdens of all divisions?

Is it possible to affect one division without being deemed uncaring or selfish if you do not necessarily affect all divisions? (After all, who does the “deeming”?)

Let’s put this in the “Tsunami Issue”!!!

Well, now what?
Do we “help” or not?
Is the “help” we (and others) give to the countries involved going to change their ideas about the U.S.? Who is “their” ideas? Is it the people, or, the ruling party (with their secret police and armies)? What about the people who live inland and are not affected by the tsunami?
Will money and aid change “their” ideas or will the “help” be just absorbed in a time of natural disaster and survival?
Do we expect any changes?
Can we risk “not doing”?.... What do we risk by “not doing”?

Are the divisions by “inland” and “shorefront” people different?
(Again, there are millions of people in the nations affected! Is it possible to affect one division without being deemed uncaring or selfish if you do not necessarily affect all divisions?)

Again....

Can we or should we divide the world? .......
When should we divide the world? ........
How should we divide the world? ........

Government - #101 - #33 - When is it right for America to declare “war”?

There is only one obvious answer....
“When America is physically attacked on its own territory by “attackers” on its own territory.”

But this answer is NOT so simple!

What about the people who are simply against “war” in every case?
What if America is attacked on its own territory but its attackers are NOT on American soil! Does America have the right to “self defense”?
What if the attack is on American “interests” not located on American soil? Who or what determines American “interests”? ........ (By the way, what are American “interests”?)
What about treaties with other countries “to come to their aid in times of attack”? Do we honor these treaties?
What about war in the prevention of genocide?
What about war in the “change of an unjust or cruel regime”?

You see it’s not that simple!!

Take “war” and the people who are simply against violence and killing in every case. What is their “successful alternative”? It’s all right to be against something but what are they “for”? Negotiation and more negotiation have their limits. By whom, or by what or when are these limits reached? Who decides? What happens in the “meantime”? Who or what is responsible for the loss of life or territory in the “meantime”?
Take “self defense”! What constitutes “self defense”? Only attacks to “repel”? What about strategic attacks that can reduce the power of the attacks? Are they included in “self defense”? Do you have to see a mushroom cloud or a medical plague before you can recognize an “attack”? Is “pre-emptive attack” included in “self defense”? Who decides?
Is a treaty a matter of American “interests”? Is a friend or ally a matter of American “interests”? Who decides?
Is knowledge and awareness of genocide or unjust and cruel treatment by a regime to be overlooked or be confronted by America? If war and invasion turn out to be an option, do we consider this option?
If hurricanes, earthquakes, flooding, medical scourges and famines affect other countries, does America spend its personal treasure to alleviate these conditions since it may not be judged by some “in American’s self interest”? Who decides?

What is “America’s interest” in the world?
Who decides? Who cares? Who or what is a measure of this “interest”?

When is it right for America to declare “war”?

These questions MUST BE ANSWERED!!
America, as a country, has to have a “roadmap” so we all know what we are supposed to do.
Without a “roadmap” we DON”T have a nation!

Government - #101 - #32 - What Kind of America will it be?

(After the election, that is!!)

Suppose 48% of the people who vote are “against”, and 52% of the people who vote are “for”; what are the people who are “against” suppose to do?
Will we see riots, demonstrations, parades?
If only 100% of the vote represents only 30% of the people entitled to vote, how many people does this really represent?
If all the people who are entitled to vote represent 60% of the entire population of the U.S. (which is something around 250,000,000 people), what do these other people do?
Are these “other people” or the “70% of the people entitled to vote” supposed to just “go along” or what?

What kind of America will it be?

Are these “people” unmotivated, lazy, or “don’t care” ?
“These” could easily represent 150,000,000 people!!!! ... a vast majority!!
What do we feel “they” will do?
What do we feel “they” should do?

Do “they” just “go along”?
Suppose “they” don’t agree with different views of the winner?
Suppose “they” can’t agree amongst themselves?

What kind of America will it be?

What will the outcome be?
Can “we” effect the outcome? .... How? (be specific!)
Is the fact that the voters and listeners to the media will not allow a nuclear solution in spite of the inhuman killing by a group which wants to “rule the world” (or at least intimidate the world for some other purpose) enough to pull the effective “teeth” out of our ability to stem this tide of inhumanity and irrational thought, what then is the solution?
Does this mean we go on “as is” forever?
Is the fear of so-called “collateral damage” eliminate the mass destruction of areas of the world that appear to offer inhumanity and irrational thoughts as a threat to the survival of our America?

Does the so-called “collateral damage” include the newly educated younger generation? How about their mothers who joyfully appreciate their martyrdoms or accept payments on their behalf?

Do we really care about the criticisms of the rest of the world who does not wish to join us in our fears?
Should we really care about these criticisms? .... Is our decision as to what is threatening to us to be decided alone? ..... only in concert with others? ...... only by so-called “world opinion”?

Who decides these things for America?
What of the dissent in America? ... What should “they” do?

What kind of America will it be?

Government - #101 - #26- Are we a “nation” or have we become just a “collection”?

Let’s start with definitions!

By “Nation” the author means a specific geographical location that has boundaries. It is populated by a group of people who are personally bound by written laws, regulations, and a written master plan. These so-called “rules of society” are basically accepted but can be changed from time to time by a preset “judicial procedure”.

By “a Collection” the author refers to the same geographical description that is populated by “groups” of people who are NOT bounded by, and do not recognize or accept, the existing “rules of society”. They prefer to live by their personal choices or former ethnic ideas and “rules of society”.

The “Collection” idea is promoted in part by the name of “ethnic diversity”. The question naturally arises “Who or what can rule a society that is NOT bounded by anything? If you don’t like the word “rule” may the Author suggest the words “guided by”? If there are no “rules”, what creates “order” instead of “anarchy or the rule of the most physically powerful”?
So far, we have opted for “the rule of law” instead of “rule by the most physically powerful”.

We have the Martha thing, the Enron thing, the Gay rights’ thing, the WMD thing, the Liberal versus the Conservative thing, exporting jobs, etc., etc. But no one seems to recognize the critical difference between a “Nation” and the “Collection” principle. These “other things” pale in comparison to the determination of just what we are now and what we may become!

Has the “written word” become so challenged, so complicated, that it has lost its significance, its meaning, its importance? Do the people who are NOT bounded by the “written rules of society” reject the ideas or do they simply not understand their meaning? Do they simply have different ideas? It is on the answers to these questions the idea of being a “Nation” balances!

As the written word becomes less important, physical violence will takeover the resolution of differences.

True leadership had better spend its time on influencing the importance of words and defining these written words... in all issues. Name calling, criticism and challenging only help to diffuse the very importance of words in our present society. If leadership does not take an active roll, who can? Do we look forward to a future of anarchy and physical violence?

Again, as the written word becomes less important, physical violence will takeover the resolution of differences.

But ..... “I can’t do anything about it!” ..... “I just want to survive ....leave me alone!” ..... “You’re giving me a headache!” .... “I don’t even speak English much less understand what you are talking about!”

It doesn’t look good for a “Nation”!!




Here are some obvious questions........

1. How do we encourage the less interested, less informed, less motivated to become more interested in our Nation and its laws and regulations? It is just as obvious that Brittany Spears, the Survivors and MTV are the more desired by the 18 to 48 year olds. To heck with Homeland Security, the future of this Democracy, the financial strength of this country, the National debt, etc., etc. They want entertainment. They’re not interested in “ideas”! Again.... How do we encourage the less interested, less informed, less motivated to become more interested in our Nation and its laws and regulations?

2.

Government - #101 - #31 - What is the “real” problem now?

What the “real” world faces......

We have two basic ideas. One is the idea that “equality among human beings and freedom and liberty” is the way the world should be developing. The second idea is that a religious view, a “theocracy”, is the way the world should be moving.

Unfortunately these two views are in conflict.

The first idea brings with it an ever changing direction... perhaps some unwanted sex, violence, entertainment, ways of dress, continuous public harangues and arguments, and other issues the “other” world does not have to deal with.
The second “theocratic” ideal is written in a book and although it is interpreted and “proposed” by various so-called leaders (omens, sheiks, warlords and mullahs) it is not “one” idea but is as many ideas as there are “interpreters”.
If the “winner’ in this war is the “theocratic” idea, you must change your views or be killed. You are an “infidel” AND MUST BE ELIMINATED. There is little place for conflict against the “book” because opposition is unknown. No sex, no freedom, no human rights and no attempt at “freedom”.... just by the “book”!
If the winner is so-called “democracy”, there will be an ever changing of “values”, an unknown direction,

Here is the choice!
Do you want to kiss a blanket and prey five times a day and be ruled by “interpreters”, but have a written “predictable” future.
Or, do you want an unknown future and be ruled by ever changing “values”, but feel more “free”.

This is now the world we live in!
The so-called war is an attempt to choose, by force, a certain way on the rest of the world. Is there an alternative? Is the force of war the only way?
Can you “negotiate”, can you “reason” with an already written “theocracy”?

In frustration, have we gone to a war?

There are plenty sides to this dilemma. Before you choose sides, see the alternatives on both sides, then and only then can you can choose wisely.

(Democrats, Republicans, Gays, money, women’s rights, gangs, crime, MTV, Liberals, Conservatives, etc. are only time wasters. The “real” issue is your choice of the way you wish to live!!!)

Government - #101 - #30 - What Bush has failed to do!

Bush has failed to adequately make America believe “WE ARE AT WAR”! ..........
These people want to kill us!
They are not interested in negotiations
We must kill them before they kill us!
This WAR it’s not way over there! .... an ocean away..... It’s here and everywhere!
We can’t talk our way out of this! We can’t “negotiate”!
“WE ARE AT WAR”!

Our elected leaders must make the majority of America realize the seriousness of our position. We cannot deal effectively with those of us who have no use for logic or reason. We just have to let them be. God forbid if these “non-thinkers” are ever the “majority”! If so, this writing has no place to go. America must “give up”! We must lose our constitution, our standard of living, and all the so-called freedoms we now enjoy. We will change our country into something else.

Now, let’s talk about “those new pictures”! (The naked Iraqi prisoners)
What is the price of an American life compared to the horrible embarrassment of Iraqi prisoners?
If you get information that saves American lives from ambushes and attacks in time, what is embarrassment compared to killing?
If they want to kill us. How do we defend ourselves?
If we need information, how do we get it in a timely fashion from those that want to kill us?
We did not rape, torture a-la-Saddahm, or kill a-la-Saddahm. We made it uncomfortable,.... sleep derivation, bright lights, no clothes, etc., but we did not kill or maim. How come this is not publicly announced. True, what we did do is inhuman; but to a degree! How do you get timely information to save American lives? “What is the successful alternative”?

PLEASE answer this question. “What should we do instead of what we did?”
What is the price of an American life compared to the horrible “embarrassment” of Iraqi prisoners?

You simply cannot talk your way out of this specific question! Don’t add another subject. Don’t change the subject! Just answer the specific question!

The use of opinion, change the subject, add another issue, etc. only advertise your reluctance or inability to answer the question!

The lack of reason and logic in most conversation remains the single cause of “dropping out”, of “turning off”! People who need differing information to check their own beliefs or buttress their present beliefs are too few. These few people want to consider different facts. They want to use their logic and reason capabilities. They are aware of the human brain and its power. The “Diehards” areNOT interested in sharing or engaging in constructive conversation, just “telling”!

What is the ultimate good of placing the blame? (Legally you must, but “ultimately”?)
What we now need are “the successful alternatives”!
What should we do now?

Government - #101 - #29 - Some critical questions as of April 19, 2004 - #3 of #3

#101 - #29 - Some critical questions as of April 19, 2004 - #3 of #3


1. Question: What did you think of the Woodward interview on 60 Minutes? Did it change your mind?
Comments: Did you think that Woodward dealt in “facts” or “third party” chit chat?
Did you think that Woodward gained or lost “credibility” in the broadcast?
Did you think the broadcast and interview technique was tilted or was it straight news?
Did you think the money from the current sales of the book were an issue?
Did you think 60 Minutes lost or gained “credibility” in the performance of the interview?
What was your reaction to the statements in opposition made the next day by “formidable” figures in the White House? Was it all lies or propaganda? Do you believe the people highest in the Government?
BT: Many opinions are expressed about this program. Did the program or the White House statements in opposition change anybody’s mind? Was this program important in any respect? Is this just another “word game” of “I gotcha’”?

2. Question: Are there any specific proposals or are there just criticisms and defensive statements?
Comments: Is all the “oral static” in the media just “oral static” (noise) or are there any specific proposals?
Are “We must do more!”, or, “We must internationalize more!”, or, “We must be less imperial!” specific proposals? Is this the rhetoric that can produce change?
Are general conclusions now being made based on pure “oral static” (noise)?
Does the general public care whether they hear “oral static” or “specific proposals”?
Does the general public know or care about the difference?
BT: I, personally, do not think enough of the general voting or speaking public know or care about the differences between “constructive dialogue” and “oral static”. I believe that reason and logic are generally lost in this society. I, personally, believe that “opinions” have become substitutes for “facts”. I do not believe we are able to get “facts”.

3. Question: Suppose you do not believe anything you hear or see publicly. You are just “fed up”!
Comments: Where are you supposed to get accurate information?
Who determines whether the information is really truthful or not?
If you have more than one side, will the “truth” vary?
If you believe something is “true”, does that make it so?
Is there a “cure” for this problem?
BT: If you leave “room” in your conversation for a different point of view of the “truth”, you are engaged in an “exchange of views” rather than an argument. “Leaving room for” does not mean you have no convictions. It merely means that you maintain a certain point of view and you allow others to have theirs. Again, you “exchange” views. You are informed why another has a different view. Again, you are just “informed”. That does not mean you have to change. It merely means “you are informed of a different view”.



Again .... “What’s the Successful Alternative?”

Government - #101 - #23 - “How the “rich” survive!”

Recently, I have received a beautiful book of pictures and descriptions of Golf courses in the land of Colombia. I was privileged to have this Spanish book explained in English. I noted how beautiful the land was; filled with water in lakes, streams, and rivers; and somewhat mountainous, and green beyond belief! A rich land filled with coffee plantations, mines, and rich with industry. What a place to live! BUT… the guerillas wanted to have what the “rich” people have…by any means…ransom, killing, theft, etc. So the “rich” people paid blackmail to the guerillas not to kidnap, rape and pillage.

Now the government was taken over by the wealth and influence (which was sometimes by torture and death) of the drug cartels. After all a government soldier would rather work for a drug dealer at $2000 per month than his “lousy” government salary of $200 per month. So the “rich” also people paid the government to protect them and their businesses from the drug cartels.

Golf courses located 15 minutes from the major cities were the locations for “money”. Naturally, groups of criminals began to prey on the patrons of golf courses. After all, that’s where the money was! So the government on behalf of the “rich” requested security from the criminals. Soldiers were stationed “out of bounds”, sometimes hidden by trees and landscaping. Of course this was partially paid for by the “rich”.

A person’s wealth was partially demonstrated by the number of private armed guards that either surrounded his place of business or plant or his private residence. No one could safely drive from one area to another in Colombia. The risk of guerillas, armed bands, criminals and the like threatened outright robbery, kidnapping for ransom, rape and more, deterred travel.
So, in my opinion now, Colombia remains a beautiful country without security and in a semi-state of anarchy. Those that know how, live comfortably. This is no place to “just travel”.

Once again, the “rich” want to protect what they have by supporting those that can give them “security”.

In America we have two main parties “the Republicans and The Democrats”. Both sides are supported by the “rich”. The supporters want access to gain security for their “interests”. Perhaps we have not yet reached a complete disregard of “human rights” but what is so different from any place where the “rich” want security and protection from the “guerillas? The “Have-nots” continue to want what the “haves” have any way they can get it…… Has anything changed?

The definition:
The “rich” is anybody who has something to protect and wants “Government” security and protection against unspeakable, personal horrors!

**********************

Current - #201 - #23 - Is it going to be Judeo-Christian ethics, Moslem theocracy, or American Democracy???

It looks like the world will have to decide which one is to survive!
This is a “future” world….fifty years from now!

The birthrate in so-called Europe is so low that there will be less people of younger age in Europe in 20 or 30 years than there will be an the increase in Moslem population throughout the world.

“Europe” will find itself becoming more Moslem. It will probably go to war to protect itself. It won’t be a civil war, it will be another type of conflict. But it will seem a war of “survival”. Survival of a type of “European culture” versus a survival of a so-called “Moslem culture” based on its religion.

Then, of course, “American democracy” and its so-called idea of “culture” will be at war with the surviving cultural battle between “Europe” and the “Moslem” culture or religion.

It looks like “war” is inevitable. As Winston Churchill said “…victory is the only successful result of war!!!”

After all, war is “survival of the fittest” .. the “survival of the strongest”.. the “survival of the most warlike”!

It is great to muse over the “results” of war, but, first and foremost, “victory is the only successful result of war”! Then go ahead and muse on….!!!

Perhaps this subject is giving you a headache!
Perhaps you may not wish to go on? …… Bye now!!! … But for those that wish to think ahead……

This “inevitability” aspect is a harsh thing to think about. There simply has to be “a successful alternative”!

Suppose we take a look at what made us think “war was inevitable” in the first place….

1).Birthrate in “so-called Europe” is lowering…. This is a present statistical fact. But why? Is the present generation so “material-survival” conscious that sharing a limited amount of material resource among more people is self defeating? Why is there such a “material” shortage? Could it be that in order to keep “living” easy, the governments have adopted ideas and regulations that encourage less effort and more government subsidy? Therefore, the production of more “material” has become less important than “living the easy life”? To keep the same standards of “living”, less material equals less people to share it with… lower birthrates!

2).If the so-called “standard of material living” is lowered, (i.e. less food, older homes, less maintained roads, schools, less of “material” things….) and there is no negative response, the populace merely acknowledges and will do with less … NO PROBLEM!!! BUT…. If there is an outcry, a discontent, what then? Do we look for someone or something to blame? Do we change our government, our policies, “our living is easy” culture? Do we just declare a war and divert our attentions to “victory is the only successful result in war” and try and figure out what to do “after”? There are choices!
3).Can we look to history for any constructive ideas? Some think America offers nothing to look at. After all, America is new… untested! America has, after all, survived many unique trials and tribulations in its 300 year old history. It’s not 3000 years old but certainly something that has stood a few hundred years has something to look at! America has, after all, achieved at least a “material standard of life” that is being envied by some. America has adopted laws and regulations that has encouraged individual rights and entrepreneurship. It’s not perfect but there is a continuing effort. America may not be everyone’s image of a “good life” (including some Americans themselves) but certainly there is SOMETHING to be studied and considered.

Some think that other cultures have other things to be considered… Religious theocracy, Monarchy, Dictatorship, Anarchy, Tribal rule, etc. All have something to be evaluated! Both good and bad!!! Even if war is not an answer, it will be inevitable unless thinking people once again are a major influence in policy. An intellectual idea is not a replacement for a human being… any human being.
Because you possess an idea, a policy, does not necessarily mean that it would work or be successful … “for the greater good”. But war is the result of running out of useful ideas and the ability to communicate them to the majority of the people.

Do we have any real thinkers left?
Are we running out of ideas … ideas for “the greater good” of the people?
Do we have successful communicators?
Is a real “leader” a communicator or a “mighty ruler”? … Is physical force the only answer?

There is nothing in this world we can’t learn something from … good or bad!
Are we learning or don’t we want to be bothered?
Are we leaving the future to “momentum” or are we thinking?

“WAR is inevitable if we don’t learn, change and adapt.”

BUT …“Victory is the only successful result in war!”

Government - #101 - # 22 - What’s a “Fact”? - The “Target” Stores story

Recently, I was sent an email which purported to be a copy of a memorandum sent to all employees of the Target Department Stores. It was profoundly anti-American. Among other things was a prohibition against any U.S. marine from collecting toys for children at Christmas time for charitable giving to Iraqi children. Again, I say, “Among other things”!

John Michael Domino, Major, USAF, Ret.
Dick Forrey of the Vietnam Veterans Association

Recently, we asked the local TARGET store to be a proud sponsor of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall during our spring recognition event.
We received the following reply from the local TARGET management,

"Veterans do not meet our area of giving. We only donate to the arts, social action groups, gay & lesbian causes, and education."

So I'm thinking, if the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and veterans in general do not meet their donation criteria, then something is really wrong at this TARGET store. We were not asking for thousands of dollars, not even hundreds, just a small sponsorship for a memorial remembrance.

As a follow-up, I e-mailed the TARGET U.S. corporate headquarters and their response was the same. That's their national policy.
Then I looked into the company further…….

They will not allow the Marines to collect for 'Toys for Tots' at any of their stores. And during the recent Iraq deployment, they would not allow families of employees who were called up for active duty to continue their insurance coverage while they were on military service. Then as I dig further,
TARGET is a French owned corporation.

Now, I'm thinking again. If TARGET can not support American Veterans, then why should I and my family support their stores by spending our hard earned American dollars and to have their profits sent to France. Without the American Vets, where would France be today?

Feel free to pass this along to whomever you want.


Target Stores vs. Vietnam Veterans - Netlore Archive Click here for further remarks on what happened!...... Boy! was the internet a mess!!

I began to research “who owns the controlling stock interest in the Target Stores”?

1. I spoke to a dual citizen of France and America, a very educated and aware person. He said the French would never be interested in buying an American company like this. Besides, most of the products sold there were cheap and mostly from China. But he said he would call the business division of the Los Angeles French consulate’ That was January 9, 2004. Still no word!
2. I asked a personal business acquaintance in New York to verify the “controlling stock interest” of Target. “Not simply available…” was the reply!
3. I sent an email to the Public Relations person on Target’s web site. No reply!
4. I asked a person who knew an employee of Target the same question. It came back to me that Dayton was the owner of Target. They also owned Marshal Field and other like department stores. I again asked “who controls Dayton”? To date, no response!
5. I found these websites just recently, and I’m including them for your consideration.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blxcompanies2.htm
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blxcompanies2.htm
These are good "fact checkers"! .... Netlore is the same one but the subjects are different

This represents most of the “reasonable energy” I wish to expend on this subject. Is this internet email “true or real…”? I do not know. One thing I am sure of is that the internet is a sad place to find “true facts”!!

So, “What is a fact?” ….. Who really knows? Is it the “experts”, the “researchers”, the “internet”, the “media”, the “politicians”? ….. “What’s a fact?”

****************************

I have come to a state of mind where I resent “just dropping out” but I, also, realize that I lack the intellect and effort to determine a “fact”…. (if that is ever a prospect!)
I always have an “opinion” about almost everything!
I never want to be “absolutely positive about anything!
I want to be informed about different ideas.
I want to change my point of view anytime I’m confronted with, what I consider to be, a better idea.

A “FACT” is what I consider to be a “fact”. My motivation up to now has been my desire to have folks consider other ideas or questions……. This was incorrect!

My desire, now, is to live the best way I can, in my personal understanding of the world.

I do not wish to “drop out”!.....I only wish to understand!

Government - #101 - #21 – Sears takes care of its own

Yes, this one is true. I checked it out. For future reference these two sites are reliable. For verification, see either …….www.truthorfiction.com …..or www.snopes.com .

NOW THIS IS SUPPORT OF OUR COUNTRY!!!

I assume you have all see the reports about how Sears is treating its reservist employees who are called up? By law, they are required to hold their jobs open and available, but nothing more. Usually, people take a big pay cut and lose benefits as a result of being called up Sears is voluntarily paying the difference in salaries and maintaining all benefits, including medical insurance and bonus programs, for all called up reservist employees for up to two years. I submit that Sears is an exemplary corporate citizen and should be recognized for its contribution.
Suggest we all shop at Sears, and be sure to find a manager to tell them why we are there so the company gets the positive reinforcement it well deserves.
Pass it on……….

So I decided to check it out before I sent it forward. I sent the following email to the Sears Customer Service Department:
I received this email and I would like to know if it is true. If it is, the Internet may have just become one very good source of advertisement for your store. I know I would go out of my way to buy products from Sears instead of another store for a like item even if it was cheaper at the other store.
Here is their answer to my email. ……….

Dear Customer:
Thank you for contacting Sears.
The information is factual. We appreciate your positive feedback. Sears regards service to our country as one of greatest sacrifices our young men and women can make. We are happy to do our part to lessen the burden they bear at this time.

Bill Thorn
Sears Customer Care
webcenter@sears.com
1-800-349-4358
Please pass this on to all your friends, Sears needs to be recognized for this outstanding contribution and we need to show them as Americans, we do appreciate what they are doing for our military.


Again, please send this on……Bill T.

Government - #101 - #20 - The Ant and the Grasshopper

CLASSIC VERSION: The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.
MORAL OF THIS STORY……. Be responsible for yourself.

MODERN VERSION: The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and
demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NEC, ABC and CNN show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so.

Kermit the frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing "It's Not Easy Being Green."
Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing "We Shall Overcome." Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

Tom Daschle & Walter Mondale exclaim in an interview with Peter Jennings that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his "fair share."

Finally, the EEOC drafts the "Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act," retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.
The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.
The ant has disappeared in the snow.
The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.


MORAL OF THIS STORY: Vote Republican!!!

Government - #101 - #19 - What’s “better”mean to “them”!

We can make life “better” for them!!
Nobody should have to undergo their hardships!!

But what do “they” want?
Will our type of “better” actually be “better” for them?

Is it even possible for “them” to establish “our” type of institutions?
Is it just possible that “our” institutions developed in an entirely different environment from “them”?
Is it just possible that “our” civilization was lucky and was just blessed with certain basic material and climactic conditions which are not worldwide?
Could it be, that because of these certain conditions, we established certain institutions, or, did the conditions caused this establishment?
Could it be, that because of these special conditions, ways of living, thinking, and existing became established?

What is our purpose in trying to establish “our” type of institution and culture in places which are not similar to our environment and to our “blessings”?
Are the blessings of business, money, taxes, financial institutions, politics, education, etc. really a “blessing” that everyone wants?
Are we prepared to reorganize and finance the environment of others first, so we can recommend “our” own solutions? Do we want everyone to be the same? …. Is this even possible?

In a place where water is scarce and land is hardly arable, do we encourage larger populations knowing that there is already a shortage of natural human sustenance?
Is this a place where education, welfare, politics and government should be introduced? Is this a case of “survival” rather than “growth”?
Is it just possible that there are many places where mere “survival” is more important than “growth”?
Is it just possible that certain customs have grown up in certain areas that have been found more lasting , less complicated, than what we have to offer?

Doesn’t it really all come down to the protection of “our” survival, “our National interest”?
Unless we are willing to make the environments of all areas the same, we had better just “share” the knowledge of our systems rather than actively pursue the “use” of our systems.

The tried customs of other cultural and geographic areas are better left alone. Unless our “National security” is threatened, we should merely “share” our knowledge with any that wish to know rather than pursue an active role in “giving” or “establishing” our way of life.
If our “National security” is threatened we have no choice but to protect ourselves in any way available to ourselves. If we perceive a danger, we must preempt rather than wait for the “gun to start smoking”!

BUT BEWARE…. We had better be correct in our understanding of a threat! We elect the people who make these judgments. For those who disagree, they acknowledge that they do not wish to join our Nation in its judgments, in its security and in its National interest. These people have announced their desire to NOT to become part of the U.S.A. This is NOT a mere matter of disagreement. This IS a matter of citizenship, being a part of a Nation!

Government - #101- #55 - Without Comparisons, how can “people” think?

Without comparisons, how can you tell whose hungry, whose ready for freedom, etc. How can we sell anything if the people have no comparisons?

If “people” have no previous experience, how can they know what their “alternatives” are, what their choices could be?
How can you expect people to do or to act in any way if they do not understand what their “alternatives” are?

People vote for a better life…..but better for whom?
When the people can’t make a living, then they’ll want a radical change. Until that time, there will be no radical change and things will go on with confusion (but no radical change)…
We have Democrats and Republicans…. "Confusion" but no radical change.

In less than fifty years America will be ruled by a Dictator or ruled by the Military if things don’t change!

“Exert additional diplomatic “leverage” on Iran? ……(Does that really mean….anything?
Everyone wants freedom….Freedom from what?….Freedom from whom?
Hunger? …. By whose standard?...... (Live grubs or caviar are o.k. in some societies! )

Unless we have someone to elaborate the “American standards”, how can we judge the outcomes? The people we supposedly “give” the American values have no previous experience to compare it with. How do they know if this is better or worse than before we “gave” them?

In Iraq, for instance, what is “freedom” for them. Just to be away from Sadaam? How do we expect people to act when they have lived a certain way for thirty years? Do we expect to have them give up their religious preferences once they are free of Sadaam?
So they voted….Do they know the ramifications of a “unified government”? Who explained this to them? Did they vote to also agree that’s what they wanted?
How do we expect any answer?..... From whom do we expect an answer?

"Without comparisons", how can you tell whose hungry, whose ready for freedom, etc. How can we sell anything if the people have no comparisons?

Government - #101 - #18 - History should be our best teacher.

General Pershing had the “answer” …….

Born: September 13th, 1860 near Laclede, MS
Died: July 15th, 1948 in Washington, D.C.

1891 Professor of Military Science and Tactics University of Nebraska
1898 Serves in the Spanish-American War 1901 Awarded rank of Captain
1906 Promoted to rank of Brigadier General
1909 Military Governor of Moro Province, Philippines
1916 Made Major General
1919 Promoted to General of the Armies
1921 Appointed Chief of Staff
1924 Retires from active duty
Education: West Point

One important thing to note beforehand is that Muslims detest pork because they believe pigs are filthy animals. Some of them simply refuse to eat it, while others won't even touch pigs at all, nor any of their by-products. To them, eating or touching a pig, its meat, its blood, etc., is to be instantly barred from paradise and doomed to hell.

Just before World War I, there were a number of terrorist attacks on the United States by; you guessed it, Muslim extremists.

So General Pershing captured 50 terrorists and had them tied to posts execution style. He then had his men bring in two pigs and slaughter them in front of the, now horrified, terrorists.

The soldiers then soaked their bullets in the pig’s blood, and proceeded to execute 49 of the terrorists by firing squad. The soldiers then dug a big hole, dumped in the terrorist's bodies and covered them in pig blood, entrails, etc.

They set the 50th man free.

For the next forty-two years, there was not a single Muslim extremist attack anywhere in the world.