Links and comments April 22, 2014

Health Care Spending’s Recent Surge Stirs Unease  Unexpected, of course, by the people in our administration who have never run a business.

GAO report: White House directly involved in Enroll America fundraising  we now live in a third world country if your look at our graft and corruption.  We survived Teapot Dome I hope we can survive this.

Sebelius stays on just long enough to get government benefits  What hypocrites these people are, just leave me in long enough to get more from the public trough.

Guess Who Makes More Than Bankers: Their Regulators  The average compensation at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) exceeded $190,000 in 2012. The staff at the Federal Reserve is likely even better compensated, but the Fed refuses to release employee salaries.

Obama Calls for Highest Sustained Taxation in U.S. History

>US weighs curbing deportations  I thought this was already his policy.

WarOnWomen: 10K+ Rape Kits Go Untested For Years In Democrat Owned Detroit  this is so sad.  We hear about all the shootings, there must be as many or more rapes.

BLM Confirms It Killed Six Of Bundy’s Cattle  I agree with the Nevada Assembly woman who said the logical solution on a debt like this a lien. Why did they get so heavy handed?

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is criticizing the Bureau of Land Management for apparently euthanizing an unknown number of cattle at the Bundy Ranch. euthanizing? was this a humane euthanizing?  No.

I did not know about this. Did you?

Posted in Big government, Censorship, Chicago Politicians, Citizens, Civility, Class Warfare, common people, Congress, Congression pensions, Consent of the governed, Conspiracy theories, Constitution, corruption, criminalization of politics, cultural degradation, Democratic donors, Dept of Justice, domestic terroism, Eminent Domain, environmentalism, EPA Scandal, federal lands, gov't regulations, green terrorism, Historical illiteracy, Illegal immigration, Illinois, intimidation, left wing bigots, Libertarians, MoveON, MSNBC, Organizing for America, police state, Principles, Propaganda, protests, rape, resentment, Texas Politics, totalitarian government, Waco | Leave a comment

Day after Easter links and comments.

This article was in the Heritage newsletter this morning. Latest Trick for Illegal Immigrants: Granting Amnesty in Return for Military Service  I find the word Trick to be a little harsh.
I thought this had been the case for many, many years. I also know that to get into the military, an all volunteer military, they are very particular about making sure the volunteer, is intelligent, willing and able to carry our their duties. It is not for misfits, legal or illegal. It is for people who are worth having. I think if the same standards were applied to the DREAM kids as they are to the natural born citizens this is an excellent way to start the path to citizenship. We know those people did not come over the border of their own volition.
Study: Fuels from corn waste not better than gas  At least they only spent half a million to figure this out.
John fund on the difference in rhetoric from the Dems of workplace violence and terrorists.  They are getting desperate, very desperate.  I hope it is with good cause.
Yet in the current discussions about increased inequality, few researchers, fewer reporters, and no one in the executive branch of government directly addresses what seems to be the strongest statistical correlate of inequality in the United States: the rise of single-parent families during the past half century.
No wonder they wanted her out at CBS she is too eager to tell the truth. Sharyl Attkisson charges Media Matters helps produce news reports for CBS
I don’t know about the rest of the Democrat elites but his one is living in a dream world.  Wasserman-Schultz: Midterm Election ‘Absolutely Not’ A Referendum on Obama
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

More punishment than crime.

My son Ray Hoese was reading a book and came across this line:

“He thought that in the history of the world it might even be that there was more punishment than crime but he took small comfort from it.” Cormack McCarthy, The Road (2006)

He had some pretty deep thoughts on what all really constitutes a crime and posted it on Facebook.  I saw it and thought it was a great blog post. so here it is.

More punishment than crime.

I was reading this book last night (fiction) and the phrase “more punishment than crime” was used. It struck me as being the case today.

With all our rules and regulations, taxes and fines, prison, and lawsuits and legal fees – leaving people unable to even fight when they’ve been set upon by the government or private persons — or good folks gone bad in the government.

There is no room in all these policies and procedures and rules and processes, no room for people to just do what’s right for one another. There’s too much at stake. No room to just leave each other alone. And we find ourselves at the mercy of those corrupted in power, by power.

Every single thing that even hints at not being correct has to be corrected, and there is usually punishment in that correction. The prisons are called “Correctional Institutions”. That is so ridiculously euphemistic… sounds like something out of a science fiction novel.

Our governments — city, state, federal — are the worst offenders. Our elected officials are over-officialed, over-lawed. A great good could be done if many of them focused on undoing stupid laws instead of creating new ones.

Look at the tax code. Seriously, look at it. You can’t. It burns your brain like looking directly at the sun. We have to wear special glasses and hire special people to look at it for us. Look at the rules about your car registration, and truck registration and farm vehicles and tractors and bicycles and motorcycles. And with every form a tax and a fee.

All the paperwork has to be perfect, or you’re in violation.

More punishment than crime.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

If we are weak who is going to protect the world?

I hear many people say, and read what many people write, “why is it our job to protect the world?”  Well, here is my answer on that.  “Look at history.  See what happens when the USA is weak, wishy washy, run by appeasers, and isolationist.”  WWI and WWII come to mind.

So now we are taking our troops back to pre WWII levels.  Where do you think that will get us?  What do you think will happen?  It is already happening.  The middle east is on fire, Japan and China are feuding over islands and bodies of water. Richard Cohen has written this in today’s Washington Post Susan Rice and the retreat of American power.  

Ukraine on its own would be a formidable challenge. But it is not alone. It is, in fact, just another place on the globe where nationalism joins separatism to create instability. In September, Scotland will vote on secession from the United Kingdom, and while an independent Scotland is a threat to no one but the Scots (What are they thinking?), it is part of a trend.

Catalonia is uncomfortable in Spain. Belgium is forever breaking up, and in Italy, the Northern League wants nothing to do with the south. Yugoslavia, once one nation, is now effectively seven, Czechoslovakia is two, and the former Soviet Union is now 15 separate nations, one of them being Ukraine. In the Middle East, Syria is flying apart, a Kurdistan is gestating, Iraq will never be the same. And in the Far East, Japan and China, feeling their nationalistic oats, bicker over a collection of rocks.

An increasingly messy world is looking for guidance. But not only does the United States refuse to be its policeman, it won’t even be its hall monitor. The utterly false choice in Syria articulated by Rice — America can do nothing because it won’t do everything — is noticed by the rest of the world. Obama threatened “consequences” if someone stepped “over the line” in Ukraine. Ah, another line. Is it red?

Others are writing of the state of the world also.  Ed Rogers writes that America’s decline could be come a campaign issue.  And it certainly should be. In that opinion piece he says this:

And no less than Washington Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt says that the president’s “turnabout on foreign policy has been … dizzying” as President Obama adjusts his rhetoric to match the elections. Each makes the point that the president is either leading the retreat from the world stage or bungling America’s foreign policy.

But, of course, being a campaign issue is not the main point. The stability of the world is at risk.  When we are weak others want our place, and they are not as well intentioned as most in the USA are.  In the Wall Street Journal  Niall Ferguson writes of America’s Global Retreat and says this

The scale of the strategic U.S. failure is best seen in the statistics for total fatalities in the region the Bush administration called the “Greater Middle East”—essentially the swath of mainly Muslim countries stretching from Morocco to Pakistan. In 2013, according to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, more than 75,000 people died as a result of armed conflict in this region or as a result of terrorism originating there, the highest number since the IISS Armed Conflict database began in 1998. Back then, the Greater Middle East accounted for 38% of conflict-related deaths in the world; last year it was 78%.

Mr. Obama’s supporters like nothing better than to portray him as the peacemaker to George W. Bush’s warmonger. But it is now almost certain that more people have died violent deaths in the Greater Middle East during this presidency than during the last one.


As Nixon-era Secretary of State Henry Kissinger argued more than half a century ago in his book “A World Restored,” balance is not a naturally occurring phenomenon. “The balance of power only limits the scope of aggression but does not prevent it,” Dr. Kissinger wrote. “The balance of power is the classic expression of the lesson of history that no order is safe without physical safeguards against aggression.”

What that implied in the 19th century was that Britain was the “balancer”—the superpower that retained the option to intervene in Europe to preserve balance. The problem with the current U.S. geopolitical taper is that President Obama is not willing to play that role in the Middle East today. In his ignominious call to inaction on Syria in September, he explicitly said it: “America is not the world’s policeman.”

But balance without an enforcer is almost inconceivable. Iran remains a revolutionary power; it has no serious intention of giving up its nuclear-arms program; the talks in Vienna are a sham. Both sides in the escalating regional “Clash of Sects”—Shiite and Sunni—have an incentive to increase their aggression because they see hegemony in a post-American Middle East as an attainable goal. 

I am not a national figure, I have no stature in political circles, but I have lived a long time and I see the world through eyes that were young during Pearl Harbor, but I remember it well and I remember history beyond then and up until today.  I have always loved history and know very well the old saying “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”  It is my sincere hope and wish that the USA does not allow a global war to happen because we followed a man known as Barack Hussein Obama over the cliff.



Posted in Americanism, exceptualism, Iran Syria, Iraq, Islamic slave trade, Libya, Military, Patriotism, Pear Harbor, Political Correctness | Leave a comment

We are in A Brave New World and Animal Farm, it must still be 1984

Our country is so PC conscious, so split and divided that each side looks on the other with total disdain and in some cases hatred. Many are afraid of the “right wing” and think if they were in charge there would be total control, spying by the NSA, spying by the IRS, the CIA and thought control.

Well guess what?  That is what we have now. The problem is Americans aren’t really going to sit still for total control. (I hope.)  Here are the headlines to to show why I say this.

Climate change believers are trying to silence the messengers of even those in the middle.

This writer in an article from USA Today thinks we may have started fighting back against government intervention because the administration has backed off on the license plate tracking scheme and the FCC monitoring radio and other media. I wonder if those two weren’t just trial balloons to see how far they can go. (the writer is Glenn Harlan Reynolds aka Instapundit)  Then there is this about that: What was the FCC newsroom ‘survey’ really about?

Climate predictors should be embarrassed about this: Farmers’ Almanac More Reliable Than Warming Climate Models

Iowa voter fraud investigation concludes; 80 additional cases referred to prosecutors when they say there is no voter fraud quote this. It is only one example. I know there have always been examples of voter fraud, but they seem to be getting worse and the Democrats seem to think there is none.

Mr. X from NYC tells us this: There are times in history when a strange herd mentality takes over a population. It can come from both the Left and the Right and it never leads to anything good. Over the last decade and especially since the election of President Obama, there is a growing wave of anger towards anyone who doesn’t conform completely to the Left’s progressive (formerly liberal) agenda. It is not unlike the Cultural Revolution in the 1960s when millions of young students rampaged through China, lofting their little red books in the air. It’s a mindset that must destroy anyone who doesn’t agree with it.



Posted in Big government, Censorship, Chicago Politicians, CIA, Drones, Egyptian Uprising, election fraud, election waves, EPA Scandal, equal protection, ethics, far left, Fascism, govenment schools, Hypocrisy, IRS, left wing bigots, leftism, Liberalism, Media Bias, Political Arrogance, Political Correctness, Politically Correct, Progressives | Leave a comment

Washington’s Farewell Address 1796

From The Avalon Project – Yale Law School


Friends and Citizens:

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.

I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.

The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it
In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.

Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.

The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry.The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.

While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?

To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support.Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty.The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency.They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it – It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.
How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.
In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the twenty-second of April, I793, is the index of my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it.
After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.
The considerations which respect the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.
The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.
The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.
Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.
Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.



Geo. Washington.
Posted in Americanism, beginnings, Bible, Big government, Campaign finance, Christianity, Citizens, Civility, Class Warfare, Congress, Consent of the governed, Constitution, cultural degradation, exceptualism, Federal spending, gov't regulations, gov't waste, Government Waste, moral values, next president, presidents, Principles, Tax laws, Taxes, United States | Tagged | Leave a comment

I send an email list a number of links with comments every day. It is what I do instead of blogging every day.  I am planning to try to put those links up here every day, it’s a job, but someone has to do it.

I’m proud of my daughter Teresa Hoese Thibodeaux for posting this on Facebook and calling it to my attention:
For Want of a Nail
For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
The Metcalf Incident

At the end of the attack, in the words of reporter Rebecca Smith, who put the story together through interviews, PG&E filings, and police video: “A minute before the police arrived, ‘the shooters disappeared into the night.” As simple as that.

The Metcalf power station was down for 27 days and the cost of the damage was estimated to be $15.4 million. Electrical power to Silicon Valley was not disrupted only because officials rerouted power there from other sources.

In the scheme of things in the world today, that’s no big deal, right? That seems to be the official response to the attack. As Rebecca Smith put it: “…quoting an FBI spokesman in San Francisco saying the bureau doesn’t think a terrorist organization launched the attack. Investigators, he said, ‘are continuing to sort through the evidence.’ PG&E, in a news release, called it the work of vandals.”
Fortunately, not everybody is so sanguine. Jon Wellinghoff, who was at the time chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, is quoted as saying the Metcalf attack “was the most significant incident of domestic terrorism involving the grid that has ever occurred.”

As I’ve said before, read it all.  This is the reason so many have taken the survivalist training and are prepared for the worst.

I hate to call names, but the term useful idiots comes to mind when I read things like this. Senator Tom Harkin; Once Bitten Twice Duped

If Justin Beiber had returned from Cuba smitten with its healthcare and calling it “awesome!” most Americans would understand. But Iowa Senator and Obamacare champion Tom Harkin serves as chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. He just returned from an official tour of Stalinist Cuba hailing its healthcare as “quite remarkable.”

Obama’s MyRA is like a lot of his executive orders- not exactly legal.

I cannot believe an adult actually wrote this: Why do the Republicans want us to work all the time? umm…. maybe it’s because if you are able you should support yourself and your family and not depend on others?  Has the author considered what the alternative actually is.  How many artistes are there out here? There are many talented people but do we really need to support their muse?  I don’t really think so.  Emerson, Thoreau, I don’t think they expected tax money would be used to support them. In regards to this I know we’ve all been thinking Orwell lately. Ed Driscoll puts it in words.  Is Peak Orwell Sustainable?

I read Alan Caruba’s Warning Signs on a daily basis. Here is one of his good ones, meaning he said it better than I could and I agree wholeheartedly. There is No Global Warming and Will Be None for Decades 

Second Amendment applies to carrying guns in cars 


Posted in American thinker, class envy, Cuba, cultural degradation, Dependency, environmentalism, executive orders, gun control, Historical illiteracy, Obama Health Care, Political Lies | Leave a comment

It’s been a long time coming but I’m ready to blog again, so here is my State of the Union address

I haven’t stopped reading all the news and sending out my links and comments to others, I just haven’t had time for putting down my thoughts in blog form. So, a belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Now to the thoughts.  I have more than one. But the biggy is basically;  Have we reached a tipping point?  Are we already off the edge of the cliff? Is it all downhill from here? Can we over come more than half our people being on welfare? Are they?

Now, of course I don’t know the answer to those questions but they are my big concerns.  I decided around mid December to put on a happy face and have happy thoughts for Christmas. At my age one never knows how many Christmas seasons we have left to share with our loved ones so that is what I did.

I pushed these questions down as far as I could in my mind and thought on the good things. Personally I have many of those. I have three wonderful children, four wonderful grandchildren, and four wonderful great grandchildren, and just like those in Lake Woebegone they are all above average.  My husband is still healthy and active. I still have five wonderful siblings, too. Life is good for all of us.

So now on to the state of the nation and the world.  All is not well with them. 

The Middle East is on fire. Iran is developing THE BOMB, apparently with our president’s blessing; Iraq is returning to civil war with Al Queda, we are now “supplying small weaponry” (as if we didn’t leave an arsenal’s worth over there); we are “withdrawing” from Afghanistan, (although some people are still being deployed there) which leaves everyone there extremely vulnerable; Syria is still committing suicide; Egypt is under the same control it was under before the big uprising, and in general if it is in the Middle East, Iran, the Taliban and Al Queda are doing their very best to kill and maim as many as they can.

STATE OF THE UNION - Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act is still changing with every day and the so called intellectual elite in Washington are not smart enough to know that to develop a database you have to have a firm grasp of every variable and they cannot be changed at the whim of whomever thinks they are in charge.  There have been so many changes in who is waivered, who is eligible for help, who is not, what is covered, what is not covered, and to make it even more clumsy that all changes every week, too. So many have had their old plans cancelled only to be sold the ones that confirm to the weekly version of Obamacare  which is much more expensive because you do not pick and choose what coverage you want, you are told what you need and this is the way it is.

The EPA is under fire and suit, but that hasn’t stopped their arrogance.  Watch C-span and you can see they are very convinced they are the ultimate authority and in this administration they may be.

Climate Change- or as it was formerly known, AGW/Global warming, is still changing.  Scientists are beginning to think it might be caused by the sun, warming or cooling. Who would have thought it?  Well, I would have as that is what I was always taught back before the subject was taken over by politics.

Unemployment is a real concern for me.  How many people can we support? When you have so many people leave the workforce because they cannot find work; because they found a way to claim disability; because they have reached an age to retire and cannot find work anyway; and then you have those who do not want to work because they would rather surf, (an authenticated case) or whatever it is they do while inland, then who does support them? Who has money left over for goodies after the taxes go to pay for the truly needy and the freeloaders?  And how do you really tell the difference?

We are a compassionate nation.  We give more to charity and volunteer work than any other nation and we do it in great abundance. But there comes a point when reality sets in and we find we cannot afford some of the disbursements given by tax money to others. What is the solution? I don’t know. I am not schooled in economics but my common sense tells me that a business has to know a little of what the future holds in taxation and regulations before it can go forward and that is not happening to businesses today. As far as I can tell, nobody knows what to expect.

Education We need to get back to the basics.  Teach reading, writing and arithmetic. Reading is fundamental, it made a good slogan, but it is true.  If a student is not reading fluently by third grade then the rest of the school years are lost on him. Intense reading instruction, one on one teaching phonics is called on in that case. Good students can teach other students in reading.

Writing Writing means two things; one is being able to legibly present words that can be read by others, the other is to put those words into thoughts that can be understood by others. Grammar is what helps to put those thoughts in order so as to convey them to others. I have to confess I am not satisfied with this paragraph, grammar is what would help you rewrite it for me.

I say arithmetic, not math.  Math comes in when arithmetic is firmly established. Adding, subtracting, multiply and division, and basic fractions taught in the old fashioned way put a man on the moon and made heart surgeons capable of repairing bad hearts and arteries. Algebra and higher math should only come in when those basics are learned, by rote and forever forged in the mind.

Culture  When we have a no holds barred and open to everything culture we have NO culture. We just have life.  There are rights and wrongs. I am not saying everything is black or white, I am saying standards are good.  We should have some. 

Posted in 20 Questions, Big government, blame game, boondoggle, Bureauracy, Capitalism, Cargo Cult, class envy, Class Warfare, Conservatism, criminalization of politics, cultural degradation, deadbeats, education reform, environmentalism, EPA Scandal, estate tax, financial crisis, Fiscal responsibility, gov't regulations, gov't waste, government healthcare, Green business, Health Care Bill, healthcare, hidden taxes, higher education, Historical illiteracy, Iran, Iran Syria, Iraq, Jihadist, Junk science, Lake Wobegon, Libya, Military, Muslim extremism, muslim violence, NASA, Obama's Policies, Obamacare, Principles, Taliban, Tax laws, totalitarian government, Unemployment, waivers, war on terror, welfare | 7 Comments

Remember Pearl Harbor

The day President Roosevelt said “will live in infamy.”  I wonder if it is being forgotten. I know some of us old fogies will remember, but what about the rest of the nation. Does anyone under the age of, say 40, remember December 7th without one of us reminding them.

I hear the boomers are retiring now.  They probably remember because their parents were the ones who were affected by that day.  Our lives changed completely. I have never met anyone who was alive and aware of their surroundings who does not remember that day when everything changed.  I haven’t seen a high school history book lately and I wonder how much time they give to this event that caused so much disruption in the United States of America.

Yes, I know. Sept 11, 2011 is a day to remember and I do remember it as distinctly as I remember Dec 7, 1941. I was a very young child in 1941. I don’t believe life in America has changed as much since 9-11 as it did from the Pearl Harbor attack. Life was so very different in that time.  We did not have television but listened to the news on the radio and saw “newsreels” at the movie theaters once a week. We lived in a small town in Oklahoma, but not for much longer.  We and many others moved to where the “war plants” were.  Where things necessary for producing arms, ammunition and military equipment were built.

Mass movement of peoples has been the story of this nation.  But it had settled down, those who wanted to go west had left and gone with the Great Depression, the rest began moving around with World War II. And of course, many young men, and some women, joined up for the Army, Navy, Marines and other military related work and jobs.

Technology developed for the military changed our lives in so many ways but our attitudes towards others also changed.  We became a more open nation (maybe that is only my opinion), open to modern life, open to modern mores, open to differences in the people we knew. At this point in my life I think that has been taken to the extreme. But time has changed so much.  Many families didn’t have cars, the buses ran from town to town, city to city.  The trains ran through most towns. The highways were two lanes and freight rode the rails instead of those same lanes. Some of the towns had trolleys instead of buses.  And people were expected to be honest. A man’s word was supposedly his bond. Some contracts were on a handshake.

We’ve lost a lot since those days. We’ve gained as much or more. Life is far more safe, comfortable and healthy, but is it happier?  For some I’m sure it is, but really, is it? Why do we have so many on drugs?  What make a person need that relief from real life?  Have we lost our soul as a nation? I don’t know but I am afraid we have. I hope I am just that old person who thinks things were better in the old days.

Update:  I  updated with the video and as I watched the last of it I could only think of our ongoing “talks” with Iran. If you don’t know history you cannot learn from it.



Posted in Fascism, Fascist, imperialsm, Iran, Japanese work ethic, Pear Harbor | Leave a comment

Would our military actually fire on veterans or other civilians?

I was sent an email with a link to an event that happened in 1932.  It was a video of the newsreel of the Bonus army  of WWI vets that marched on Washington and was subsequently attacked; attacked by some who became our heroes of WWII. The sender had not heard of this.  I had it in history, right here in little old Rockport High School back in the early 1950′s (population 1750 at that time).  I thought everyone of my age, or near my age, had heard about it.  If you haven’t, read this Wikipedia link for information on the event and watch that video.

Well,  I had been thinking a lot about this because of all I’ve been reading online about the many top leaders of the military who are being let go for one reason or another.  Surely some of these are legitimate reasons but there have been too many to think we have that many  miscreants in charge of our armed forces.  There are so many articles on this I will just link to the Bing search page for it.  Take your pick on what to read.

Another thing I have been reading about is about FEMA camps and the militarization of the police. There are so many links to these FEMA camp articles that again I am linking to a Bing search page, take your pick on what to read on this one, too.

Now for what I think about this.  The early 1930′s had a population and an army of veterans who were not as well educated as we have now.  I have heard many were rejected because of bad eyes, really bad and missing teeth and many other health considerations most of which were caused by poverty.  Many of them did join the army as a way to make a living.  That was probably true until the draft was done away with. Now when you hear people go into the army for an escape it isn’t true, they are not illiterate or under educated.  There are some really stringent rules, regulations and IQ tests before you can join. they actually reject quite a few for misdemeanors and not passing the literacy or IQ tests. It really is an all volunteer and fairly well educated military.

As for whether the generals would actually fire on veterans, I have shown links to the military getting rid of top personnel.  Is this why?  I don’t know, but I really do wonder about it.  With the advent of the tea parties and the Oath Keepers it is a real question to be asked.  There was no such thing back in that day. People tended to follow the government orders just because they were from the government.  Many still do but there are far more who would question an order like that.  They are more educated and aware of the consequences.

I doubt history would repeat itself.  How many did Nixon have to fire? We are still commemorating  what happened at Kent State. And, we have the Oath Keepers, for more about them go here and here.  For some they seem too radical, for others they seem to be a port in the storm of the trashing of the constitution and the threat of the FEMA camps. Whatever you may think of them, their intentions seem to be honorable.




Posted in Big government, Citizens, Class Warfare, Conspiracy theories, criminalization of politics, Crisis/Opportunity, domestic terroism, equal protection, FEMA, General Patton, intimidation, Military, Oath Keepers, Political Arrogance, The Constitution | Leave a comment