About Me

Name: CyberMom
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

An Empire revisited - freedom lost

Posted by CyberMom on Friday, June 26, 2009 3:14:17 PM
Quite some time back I discussed America as an up and coming Empire - An Empire being:
 
1. The region over which Imperial Dominion is exercised,
2. A group of countries under a single authority (which, Great Britain, and America, both qualify as),
3. A monarchy with an Emperor as the head of state,
4. conglomerate, a group of diverse companies under common ownership and run as a singular entity
 
An Imperial Dominion - a supreme ruler over all nations. Look at what America is - is it a Republic? Well, a Republic is a conglomerate, but the people have influence over the government through some form of Democracy or similar political structure. I'm not really sure that America completely qualifies as a republic any longer, given the limitations on freedom, passing of laws without representation and misrepresentation in the passing of certain laws which place dominion and control on the people. Of course, as we are on the path to a Marxist Socialist way of life, the definition of an Empire becomes more clear for America. Actions in our economy such as "the New Deal," by Roosevelt, most certainly took us away from being a Republic and began instituting solid foundations in Imperial Dominion.
 
As I discussed in my last article, "The New Deal '2'," the investment of the government into overpricing is most certainly tearing our economy apart as it's replaying the events that helped lead up to the great depression. A loaf of bread that was $2 is now $100, and box cars that were $75,000, are now $2,000,000; and the government won't back those items at those inflated prices, or else the currency, it's "I.O.U.'s," would devalue the gold that backs it. If you read about what happened with Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac, GSE's that bought overpriced Mortgages/home loans (that the people couldn't repay, driving home prices through the roof), and how AIG created insurance policies to back these overinflated mortgages, you begin to see more and more of how the government, with a power/rule that far exceeds a standard "Republic," committed an act which helped contribute to the dramatic economic difficulty we're in now. The problem is, AIG is holding onto insurance policies that the government won't back. Amtrak's holding onto boxcars that the government won't back. But, because of their being in bed together, because of GSE's and special interest and Wall Street, the government creates bail outs and stimulus packages that do what? Bail out the government - NOT the people. Is that a Republic? Is that representing the interests of the people? Does that even INVOLVE the people, or were the people just pawns in this big, game? It's GSE's... bailing out GSE's, and in the process, gaining MORE control of those companies, such as AIG (as they already had Amtrak), and suddenly, the definition of an Empire as a conglomerate, run as a single business, begins to be made even MORE clear.
 
Roosevelt's "New Deal," and all of the sham government controls over things like "social security, housing and civil works," would crash if the government crashes. They are inflated as it is now, and as economists have warned, will become hyperinflated. The government won't back them. That's why, when you heard that AIG had to be saved to protect companies and GM had to be saved to protect jobs - it did NOTHING. the same jobs were all still lost. The same bonuses were all still given. The bailouts and the stimulus have nothing to do with protecting the people - only the GSE's - the government - and its special interests. If jobs are saved along the way, then great - but that's only a "secondary," to the main goal of government covering their own actions. See, if AIG failed, the banks would need to collect on the debts. Who do they go to? The same GSE's that purchased the overinflated mortgages in the first place ... Uncle Same (through Freddie Mae and Mac). But, Uncle Sam can't back the bank's demands without devaluing the gold. If the dollar's worth 10 pieces of gold instead of 1 - think about what that would mean to the rest of the world and their wanting to collect... we'd be in a world of hurt.
 
This has been seen in history where an Empire overspends. Julius Caesar was spending left and right, building his armies, catering to the poor (through entertainment, not actually "solving," their problems...) to make them "believe" he was cool, then turning on them. His power was becoming absolute and he was ruining the country. He had to be stopped. Hitler originally invested in a lot of programs that supported a lot of jobs, until he began internalizing his power to become an Emperor. He began spending on government only projects - increasing his military's strength, specialized weapons projects, funding internal government sources to be his personal regime to maintain absolute authority, and this got him in trouble with his fellow leaders and the people. Jobs declined, but the government got wealthier. He had to be stopped. The British Empire had stretched its arms out to the world and spent a lot of money to do it. In fact, in all its spending, it sold itself short. It soon began to lose hold of its colonies. In America, where the King of England was lavishing his own with monies, it created dissention and chaos, even with their neighbors, France. The point is - everywhere overspending has been an issue, the value of the economy and currency declined, nothing good came of it. This includes the Great Depression and America. The government helped march us there, and rather than march back out, they somehow convinced us to let them keep going.
 
Are we a Democracy? That's a question you have to answer for yourself. Are we free? I certainly hope you don't think that getting to print a few words on the internet is freedom- because I can assure you - even though another is typing these words for me, both they and I do so in fear of retribution from our government. Have you control in voting on how YOUR tax dollars are spent? A republic would. Do you have control in what laws are passed? A republic would. Do you have control of who's in the primaries for you to vote on in an election, or who gets to be president without the electoral college's special interference OR who the next supreme court justice would be? A democracy... would. This isn't even a representative democracy. People were angry about the AIG spending, but would the government take the hit for what they did and represent the people? Nope. They said, "Bad AIG, no more really, really big, personal bonuses for you - only little ones." Is that... representing what you wanted?
 
Your stimulus monies have gone mostly to law enforcement for the streets and justice for the courts and special interest for the government, while the jails and schools suffer. Is that what you voted on? I mean, after all, you know that when there's no money left, you'll have to join in on the rioting to get bread to feed your family, so it's good there's more law enforcement to stop you, right? Hmm....
 
Are you even getting a say so in the legalization of marijuana? HAHAHAHAHA - I don't care to comment on what I think about it - but we're talking about a very OLD and very SENSITIVE issue - and you get NO voice. Especially, if you're NOT for it, and it gets passed - did your 'elected official,' do what you elected them to do (or vice versa)?
 
A republic, this is not. Not anymore.
 
A capitalist country, this is not, not under the conglomeration of private business to government say so and control.
 
A democracy, this is not. Not with the voice of the people fading into the wind.
 
So, what are you left with? Do the math people. Not too many choices out there. There's socialism, and marxist socialism. There's communism, monarchy's and dictatorships. There's aristocracies (which America has been for a long time now) and fascism (which also defines America's political structure perfectly).
 
Sure - there are a few other choices. But, once you've passed by a republic and a democracy, and capitalism has declined - so has freedom. So, whatever your equation ends up with - freedom is not going to be a part of it anymore.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The New Deal "2" - Death of an economy

Posted by CyberMom on Friday, June 26, 2009 2:01:50 PM
Okay, if you want more background on this, please read my last post: Economic Forecast Follow-up. Be forewarned, what I'm about to give you is not a "prediction," an "estimation," a "best-guess," or a "conspiracy." I can promise you, it is not paranoia or any personal agenda that prompts me to write this. The foundation of what I'm about to present to you is the title of this entire blog: When Governments Lie - the people suffer. And, it's true. When our elected officials no longer represent us, act on our behalf or care whether or not their actions are hurting the people, then the control spire which was there to make sure that our "Government," in the land of the free and home of the brave, is no longer functioning. The government is no longer of the people, by the people ....
 
or for the people.
 
The Democratic Party - the party in control of the White House, in control of the Presidency and in control of the Economy, under the leadership of President Obama, is taking a dangerous position that is counter-productive to our economy and our stability. I usually hate taking sides folks, but this time around, the actions from the Government and the media being lead by them cannot be attributed to any other source. I'm not saying the Republicans are the only right ones - because our party has not done its job in cleaning house when this is the PERFECT time to do so (because we don't have influence in Washington, we might as well spend this time getting our party straight). But, the Left is in control, and it is under the direct leadership of the Left, no bleed-through from any previous administration, which is misleading the people. How so?
 
Obama has been encouraging investments in the Stock Market, and under this article, perhaps you will take as much delight as I did in the first sentence: "It's official. Obama thinks you're an idiot." I'll let you read that article to fully understand all the little quirks of Obama's "invest in the stock market to prove to America we're doing okay" plan. But, I'd like to draw your attention to another point of the stock market known as GSE's (government sponsored enterprises). These are not new, and have been around since the early 1900's. However,  GSE's started out as a different purpose than what they are today. You should note the following: The government possesses warrants with 79.9% ownership in these companies that would allow them to walk in and take full control at any time. With more recent companies like Freddie Mac and the banking/mortgage institutions, the government has several TRILLION $$'s in assets on record. What are those assets? Our HOMES.  The GSE's include ownership of companies - and stocks in the capital market - including WALL STREET (ie. their ownership of ... oil stocks.... :).. cool, huh?). This was "supposedly" to help raise long-term funds. But, let me simplify this:
 
If you invest in Wall Street - and help raise that number - there's a good chance that you're going to be investing in the government (ie. AMTRACK - who -- don't forget - was given $18 million in stimulus funds, in Delaware, for NINE box cars to be renovated, and yet, it is OWNED and controlled by the government, NOT free enterprise...). Of course, if the government wants to encourage your spending, they can simply do something as simple as... oh wait... give stimulus monies to the GSE's that are reflected in the stocks and it makes the stock market go up! So.. wait a second... let's pull all this together...
 
Could it possibly be, that the "increases," in the stock market (which some of you may have been watching what I have), seem to occur in sync with the issue of stimulus monies (and/or spending of it)? Could it possibly be that consumer confidence in Wall street IS down, and Obama, is just trying to do what he said he would BEFORE the election, and back in February? That is, to convince the American People to invest more money into the stock market? So - what does this mean? Would the government really do this? Would they issue out "stimulus" monies that mostly protect only the government and its investments and create a "false" sense of security in the stock market to encourage you to invest knowing that you're really just helping fund the government more?
 
The answer you're looking for is YES. This is EXACTLY what they're doing. If the stock market fails, multitudes of the government fail - because they get some of their monies through the stock market. AIG and others failing - was NOT about the American people, it was about the GOVERNMENT. See, no one's been telling you this. They've all said (even me), let them fail - if they're private enterprise, then let capitalism work. And, while that's true, the government's been operating quietly in the background not telling you that it's their own backsides they're trying to cover!! This is a complex issue folks, and I wish I had the space to detail this ALL for you (if I had a radio talk show - I could do it - but I know that reading LONG blogs is difficult).
 
The point is this - they're lying about the stock market and the economy. They want people to invest, or else it's the government that could collapse, and all the bogus, money-scams they've been running with it! The lie will cause you to give up your hard earned money into stocks that they own 79.9% of - and can reclaim in FULL, during times of an "economic crisis," (hmm....), and you will lose everything. This is NOT the great depression we're heading towards. Oh no, that wouldn't be as bad as what we're heading toward. Back then, when stocks dropped, it took wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread. But, you won't have wheelbarrows full, or loaves to buy, because the government's going to reclaim its ownership of your stocks, and your money, and it will shut down the borrowing capacity to farmers and agriculture who were growing the wheat that can no longer afford to do so. THAT is the real danger. THAT is the big collapse we are heading toward. I'm not an "economist," and I don't know all the "ins and outs," of financial trade. But, I do know this:
 
U.S. currency - whether paper or coin, is an I.O.U. It is an object whose value is based solely upon the ability of the signer of that I.O.U. to reimburse you for it. I buy bread from you - I don't give you anything of value, because I have nothing. I give you an I.O.U., and the point and purpose of the Federal Reserve System, the F.D.I.C. and others, who are ALL government run - NOT privately (I say this, because you might remember that Obama just broke the law and fired the inspector general - one of the "peoples'", controls over the government... so yes, be afraid, be very afraid), is so that you can take your I.O.U. note to the bank and get reimbursed. During the great depression, why then did it take a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread, did the gold that backs those I.O.U.'s disappear or its international value drop to zero? No -
 
People lost jobs, couldn't spend, and their BORROWING capacity was reduced to nil and repossessions occurred galore! The stock market crashed because banks were forcing collection on debt (remember, they're the ones backed by the gold - but for some reason, this didn't seem to matter?? oh yeah - PBS that aired that - sort of left that out... guess who owns PBS... yep - Uncle Sam). If you read Ohio's take on the cause, it's because stocks were sold for more than what they were worth (hmm.. didn't Uncle Sam's I.O.U. notes help dictate all of that?). What's the ultimate conclusion of all this: that when the government was causing the U.S. Dollar to no longer have the value it did (and yes - regardless of what you'll read in some places, the banks set that dollar standard, and they were taken over LONG ago by the government, and Uncle Sam is the one who pulled his backing of the currency), and people realized that selling an item for $1 no longer meant $1, but $0.20 cents. Now bread was worth a wheelbarrow full of money. The gold's still there, but the value of the dollar dropped because those governing it wouldn't back it up at the same level anymore. And Hoover, the President in charge in 1929, said: We don't believe in helping the individual people. Sorta' sounds like... the whole thing was the fault of a selfish/capitalist government.. but maybe I'm just guessing here...
 
The lie - and how it hurts us? Back to my blog on the $18 million that saved 9 box cars for renovation... think about this... a new box car is worth: $75,000 max, and that's with a lot of the amenities. Just like buying a loaf of bread for $100 in 1929, we're buying a $75,000 box car with $2 million dollars. See the correlation? Understand how the lie is beginning to undermine this economy? No - it's not greed that will be spawned (oohh.. my box car's worth $2 mil), because the government OWNS Amtrak. It's a failure for the stock market, because the stocks the government owns are getting undermined, and the issuance of tens of trillions of dollars that are bottoming out our economy. Who cares if it's going to take 50 years just to pay back what the government spends in 2009 alone? That's ASSUMING the dollar's value goes back up! We need to be concerned about abuses with the stimulus money, falsely reporting to people that they should be investing in the stock market, "or companies will fail," and begin understanding that the lie will cause our stock investments to bottom out and crash our economy - again! Buying stocks in Amtrak... well... you just bought $18 million dollars in box cars, that MAY be worth.. AT BEST... $900,000. Remember the 1929 crash? Stocks being sold for more than what they were worth? The government saying - hey - we're not gonna' back your stock, we can't get more than $900,000 for those box cars in international trade and we MOST CERTAINLY, can't devalue our gold! The banks saying, um - you need to give us money now, because Uncle Sam's pulling his value out of the dollar?
 
If you can see the writing on the wall.. or even if you can't.. you need to read the Top 10 New Deal arrangements made by Franklin Roosevelt. What you're going to see is that we did NOT fix the problem. We didn't even band-aid it. The government reclaimed control of those GSE's I mentioned in the last article - and the results are what you see today. What was broken, got worse. In 1929, they LET the people and the businesses fail because there was NO way to bail them out. What the New Deal REALLY did - was to make sure that Uncle Sam doesn't take as much of a hit if it happens again (yes, I know, there were a couple of good things in it, too - but not enough).
 
The next, "New Deal," is upon us - and it will HAVE to be even MORE restrictive than last time and require an even GREATER failure for the people than last time. Are you ready? I'm not...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Economic Forecast Follow-up

Posted by CyberMom on Friday, June 26, 2009 12:34:35 PM
Folks, a short while ago I posted a blog on: How not to read an economic forecast. Without having "all" the details or being an "insider," but being someone who follows the NEWS and pays close attention to what the media and government is feeding us, I boldly stated that the economic forecasters were either lying to us, or were just downright wrong in telling us retail was up because there were higher, 1st quarter earnings. For those who read it, you may remember that I stated that companies like Toyota, would definately report higher, 1st quarter earnings without GM dealerships to compete with, and stores like Walmart would report higher 1st quarter earnings with the littler, mom and pop stores having been driven out of business.
 
The brief report at Newsalert stated that on June 4th, Walmart was no longer going to report its monthly earnings because it "knew" that it was causing the economic forecasters to have an incorrect view of consumer spending behavior (and good for Walmart - maybe letting China own it was the best thing that could happen for that store!). What happened? The economic forecasters showed a dramatically sharp "drop" in retail spending from consumers (I believe the number was 24%+/-) from their previous forecast, when Walmart's individual stores were included. TWENTY FOUR percent is a HUGE number. Walmart accounts for nearly 15% of the U.S. retail economy with over 4000 stores! But, let's also consider that Best Buy has over 1,000 stores, and Home Depot has nearly 2,000 stores! The list goes on - and please check these numbers for yourself as I don't have an "economic" analyst to confirm them for me, but I know they're pretty close. What does that mean? It means - I was right. What I was telling you about the economic forecasters painting a false picture was dead on the money. People, please understand, I'm NOT boasting! In fact, it would be better if I WAS wrong. I would be much happier, because that would mean things WERE getting better - but they're NOT!
 
It was reported that Oregon's $175 million dollars in stimulus monies saved approximately 3,000 jobs. Set aside more recent reports that the so-called, "saved jobs," reports from the stimulus fundings are grotesquely over-exaggerated, because those 3,000 jobs equate to salaries of more than $58,300 PER PERSON!! The average income in Oregon in 2007 was $38,000+/-. It has NOT changed much in two years (especially with layoffs and a bad economy). Currently, the unemployment rate state-wide is 12.5%, or about 250,000 people!! What does all that mean? It means that the average person in Oregon, you know, the common workers, the little people like me (and maybe even you), are not seeing their jobs saved. The people who make this economy run - working in retail, fast food, gas, factories, production lines, and the "pleasures" of life that the wealthy community's money is supposed to give them access to - are not being helped by the stimulus package. What it also means, is that in order to save everyone's jobs, it would take $14 BILLION dollars. Unfortunately, the jobs that were "saved" were all government funded - ie. direct employment through the government or contracted labor to privately owned companies. So, the stimulus package, in the end, even if we received that $14 billion dollars, couldn't actually save everyone (oh yeah - this was the most RECENT stimulus package - you don't wanna know what we did with the rest.. hee heee hee).
 
Folks, I was right on with my concerns about economic forecasters by a government bought media (for those of you who read the TownHall magazine and know about the government's control over the media that I've been crying out loud about for a LONG time), and you can trust me when I tell you that this broadcasting of the "jobs" being saved by the stimulus money is B.S.!! And, like it or not, I can point the finger directly at the left - because they're in charge right now - so they get to bear this shame, not any "past" administration. Under President Obama, the media is providing FALSE numbers that are meant to stimulate "hope," and try desperately to save the stock market by encouraging MORE spending. The Democrats are committing one of the MOST DANGEROUS acts in this country's history - and I'll tell you how in the next post; but in the meantime, now you know just how bogus ALL of this "economic" forecasting and these numbers really are. You've been given sufficient knowledge know with which to head out into the world.
 
What will you do next?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Whitewashing the Country-part 1

Posted by CyberMom on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 5:18:13 PM
[note - this is a 'rough' draft 'excerpt' I've worked on, addressing the many ways that explain the downfall of our Great Nation...)

Whitewashing - to cover up or gloss over -

For this entry I submit to you: The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain). I submit to you also, that there was an underlying reasoning behind Mr. Clemens producing literature under an alias: he was making a political statement the likes of which was unheard of during his time. You see, for me, Tom Sawyer whitewashing the alley fence is more than just imagery of kids playing tom foolery pranks on one another, but a reflection of the Government and its people. So - let me set the scene for you (characters adjusted to today's political climate):

  • The fence is America: "...compared the insignificant whitewashed streak with the far-reaching continent of unwhitewashed fence.."
  • Tom Sawyer is The new, up and coming Government: The one sent to "cover up," the fence, leaving Tom feeling sad: "...He surveyed the fence, and all gladness left him and a deep melancholy settled down upon his spirit...."
  • Old Missis is the enforcer: "...She say she spec’ Mars Tom gwine to ax me to whitewash, an’ so she tole me go ‘long an’ ‘tend to my own business...."
  • Jim is the poorer working class/Ben the wealthier: "...Jim never got back with a bucket of water under an hour – and even then somebody generally had to go after him.."
  • Aunt Polly is the courts/regulating agencies: "...retiring from the field with a slipper in her hand and triumph in her eye..."

First - remember that Tom Sawyer was produced in 1876, during a time when Hayes was elected President through a very "sketchy" resolution, the National Convention had both parties absolutely divided and slinging mud at one another, slavery was disenfranchised, but black Americans were not yet given freedom and America, recovering from Civil War, was still in a state of turmoil. The problems that existed between parties and regions of peoples were not resolved, but instead, were being "glossed" over. Mark Twain saw the beginning of something disastrous occurring (where I also believe that Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn both represent a portion of the two, separate parties as well). So - with that said (knowing that Clemens did not get to know the disastrous, financially corrupted government of today) - let's see how Tom Sawyer has brought us forward to today's governmental body:

America is in trouble. We can either FIX the problems, or just whitewash over it - which is what we've done. For example, taxes and penalties are called: fees. High unemployment is called change. And, corrupt officials are called our 'best' hope. So, here comes Tom Sawyer ('ol Uncle Sam), lookin' at that Looooonnnngggg fence, realizing just how big of a job this is for just one person (or the handful of governmental agents), and finds himself overwhelmed. Then along comes Jim (the people). The people are the ones who aren't 'eager' to have to rush to bring up the water from the well - it'll get there. They don't care about 'corporate' deadlines or policies - they're just doin' what they're told, because 'ol misses said so. (We all do what we're told we have to do: work - pay taxes. Work - pay taxes). And, Jim's afraid of 'ol misses, cause if'n he don't do what he was tolds to do, 'ol misses is gonna whoop him up something fierce! Hey - wear your seatbelt, cross in cross-walks, don't slander authority!!

But Tom (uncle sam), doesn't like doing the work. And, when they ask for Jim's help he says: No - it's your job - and even if I'd wanted to do your job for you - I'd be in trouble for not doing my own work. But Tom's crafty, you see.... You want freedom? You want protection? You want money to purchase - and Jim says: YES! (to seeing a bandaged toe and letting Tom go down to the river for him). What happens? Well, Aunt Polly, the Courts and regulating agencies comes along and whaps the people out of the way to scold Uncle Sam and get him back to work! He has to "cover up," the underlying problems of America. Then comes along young Ben, and unlike Jim, Ben was eager for new "stuff" and new "things." So, after a bit, Tom hornswaggles the young lad into doing the worked, convinced that it's something he WANTS to do - but - in exchange for his apple. And, this went on and on until Tom went from poor - to the rich kid on the block.

Now - let's play this out in more 'modern,' terms. Sure - there's money - if you consider "IOU's," (which is what American paper/coin currency is worth - an IOU), wealth. But, you see - to have the "privilege," to work - NOT getting the things we have to do in our own homes and lives done, we gotta pay. An apple here, a kite there.... TAXES. Tom made something that was INVALUABLE (paper money), valuable, by learning that the value of an object or task is based upon the difficulty in attaining that object or completing that task. Soon - corporate greed - not in private enterprise, but through government and taxes, creates corrupted officials. It's not just the money - but the authority the government craves. And, if we want things like: FOOD, WATER, AIR, POWER, SHELTER - the BASIC necessities of life - we have to be willing to give up. But, what happens when we give up our apple?

We're hungry. Whitewashing the fence bought me this fake money that has no reward in it and I'm still hungry. So - in turn, the boys play the same game that Tom did (the start of capitalist America), taking from one another. But, Tom's no fool - he's in on EVERY piece of action by eventually saying: hey - I'll let you whitewash this fence for a fee - but in turn - you gotta pay me another fee to let someone else whitewash YOUR fence, and let me charge THEM a fee. And, like blind sheep who are told by the wolf that the grass is greener on the other side - we did it. We kept doing it. Until, eventually, we have doctors and lawyers who charge $200 per hour and up. TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS PER HOUR!?!? That makes NO sense!! But, you see - their worth is based on the 'difficulty,' to attain that position. And, unlike the 'older' days, now - only those who have more to give are permitted this privilege. But, because they gave more, they in turn need to charge more. And this DEADLY cycle continues.

Where's ol misses? Well, the enforcers still require the people to follow the rules and need authority. But, Uncle Sam (Tom), has gained control of the authority. So, they too, must give up to Uncle Sam in turn for a piece of that authority - and the birth of law enforcement and the end of freedom falls like a deadly, silent shadow, blanketing the whole of this country. Uncle Sam's still getting his fence whitewashed - still covering up the REAL problems in America - but he's using 'ol misses (aka the cops, fbi, et. al.) to do it for him he has gotten so lazy.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Whitewashing the Country - Part 2

Posted by CyberMom on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 5:14:37 PM
(continued from: Whitewashing the Country - part 2)
 
So now, not only must you pay Uncle Sam to continue in this unsuccessful, dreaded fashion and not only has it dominated our lives and lead to corruption - we're also paying Uncle Sam's henchmen to be OUR henchmen!!??
 
"There are wealthy gentlemen in England who drive four-horse passenger-coaches twenty or thirty miles on a daily line, in the summer, because the privilege costs them considerable money; but if they were offered wages for the service, that would turn it into work and then they would resign."
 
Need more proof of this? How about this: The government lists driving as: a privilege. The government defines working as: a privilege. The government defines voting as: a privilege...
 
And the government defines freedom as: A privilege. Don't believe it? Government politics, executive information and the like: knowledge of these things is a privilege, not a right, that is why we are not permitted to know these things. In this article, rights vs. privileges are examined and it is quoted in law that: "The servant cannot complain, as he takes the employment on the terms which are offered him."
 
You can read here how it was the purpose of the Republican party to fight for freedom and abolish slavery. And, today we are seeing just how the left is treating freedom - you can have the blue or green shoes - but at least you get shoes. That's freedom? No. That's the abuse of freedom underneath the same type of tyranny that is used by Kings and monopolies. It's not that I'm saying: Hey, you want protection from the bad guys, you shouldn't have to pay for it.... but, you shouldn't. The bad guys are the ones taking away your freedom in that case, and even if we mount arms against it, we're still losing our freedom under extreme work methods and taxation and what not.
 
If you don't vote, are you exempt from the rules? Nope - in fact, you're blamed for not voting for a better party. But, if you're in trouble with the law, you're ability to vote is taken away from you. So, is voting a "right?" Rights are that which cannot be interfered with by the Government - they are endowed by God and the human intellect. The term: the right to vote, is then used as a "whitewashing," of the truth, to be used a punishment against you when determined by the government to do so and FORCE you into obedience with their laws. Is that a right? Is that EVEN a privilege? No - in that case - it's neither. In that case, the whitewashing of the fence, that you paid to wash, which isn't even your fence, will lead you and those around you further down the spiral.
 
Now - some may argue about the driving thing: it's a privilege, because one has to be educated and pass the tests! Really? You mean, the tests that "certify," a person to drive, for a COST to Uncle Sam (isn't that back to whitewashing the fence...?), to sit behind a dangerous, 2000 pound chunk of steel in heavy-duty traffic, miserable (remember... it was a looonnngggg fence!)? While I won't get into my opinions on the driving matter, I simply present these issues to you in the form of Tom Sawyer's Whitewashing to show you that:
 
The government is not 'fixing,' the problem (the cars are not set to 55 mph only and constructed in a fashion to prevent accidents), they are simply glossing it over (monetizing the debt?). And, to make matters worse - when the parties that support socialism force you to wash the fence - then there is no freedom, liberty or rights involved at all. When someone's in need, (welfare), does the government offer: Hey - let's give back some of these riches we have? Can the person simply go out and play the same game (although there are no fences left to paint and they can't afford the paint?)? Or, does the government come forward to you, the painters who have already sacrificed and say: hey - that person's in need - there's no room for them on the fence to paint with us, so, until that happens, I need you to give up more of your stuff to them [so they can then, later on, pay the government for the privilege to wash the fence]. This is charity/welfare and the rest all rolled into one.
 
What's happening folks? How long before the other boys in town realize what Tom's done and come a 'knockin' at the door to tear it down? How much longer before someone calls on those "IOU's?" How far can Tom Sawyer go? Well - like the book said - he would've gone all day and bankrupted EVERY boy in town, except he just ran out of fence!!
 
How far will Uncle Sam go? Probably until the boys let him know enough's - enough - but by then, I fear it may be too late.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How not to read an economic forecast, racism and more...

Posted by CyberMom on Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:13:37 PM
It is customary for our News media to report things that are, well, just not "entirely" accurate (the nicest way I can possibly say that). Many people don't know that the word: NEWS, came from: North, East, West, and South. News was originally intended to bring the facts of events that happened from around the area, via the voice of the people, to the various towns. Obviously, long before television, radio and newspapers. However, as times change, governments grow corrupt and take over what the news can and cannot report, and provide ever-increasing, false information to the news media to illicit specific reactions from the people - we [the listeners] - are no longer given the "facts," but are subject to the infamous, low standards of yellow journalism. Let's examine some headlines from this morning (and I'll relate what I can back to my previous posts where applicable to help validate that I am trying desperately hard to present all issues in an unbiased light):
 
"In Oregon, and on ABC News radio, it was reported that jobless rates are declining. There was a significant decline in the number of reported first time unemployment seekers. Likewise, the economy is showing signs of improving as retail businesses are showing higher than expected first quarter earnings." -
 
Now - for those of you that let these so-called, 'headlines,' skip by you with little to no care as to their contents, let me first say: that is a HUGE mistake. You let this information in one ear - it does not really come out the other, I'm afraid. The truth is, it sits in your brain, it gets processed, and whether or not it's on the back-burner of your daily thoughts, it exists and has affected you. The reason: in difficult economic times, in fact of hard-driven 'fears,' the idea of relief (especially if you're currently employed and would believe that lower reports of first time filers is somehow significant for you), is of great impact to you, even if only unconsciously. But, let's re-examine the situation: tens of thousands of small businesses have closed in the past year due to the economy consistently declining. That means, those people who worked there, are already laid off. Multitudes of corporations (again, in the tens of thousands), have condensed their operations, laying of millions of workers. There are only 185 million, working adults in America as of the last Census Bureau Report I read (which I believe was 2007). That number has dropped by a very large, significant portion.
 
What does that mean? Well, let's look at the second half of ABC's economic forecast: "The economy is looking up because retail businesses are reporting a higher-than usual, first quarter profit."
 
Oh really? You mean that, for example, Walmart (now Chinese owned), with its thousands of stores, no longer has to compete with more than 100 THOUSAND businesses in the industry of retail clothing alone (and as it's a multi-product store/mega-store, this carries over into every other facet of their operations), has condensed its operations and cut a huge portion of expenses from its usual overhead, and is reporting a "higher than expected/normal," first quarter earnings? Well, NO DUHH!!! Bad economy or no - that's a GIVEN. Walmart has lower prices, and their reports don't count for just one store, they count for THOUSANDS of stores - so naturally, they reflect a higher profit margin. Does that mean the economy's doing better? NO! Maybe, IF - and I STRESS: IF - the economy's doing better, it isn't because megastores are reporting high earnings. It isn't because car dealerships are reporting higher car sales - when the reason for Toyota having higher car sales is because GM cut out THOUSANDS of its dealers!! And, most certainly, the number of reported, first time unemployment seekers has NOT declined because less businesses are going out of business or losing - it's because THEY'RE GONE!!
 
C'mon, people! I like good news far more than bad, just as much as anyone else (okay, well, a LOT more than most people since it seems that today's "sheeple," look for bad news). But, I also DON'T like being mislead. And,  I cannot and will not believe that the "economic," forecasters, the so-called, 'experts,' don't know this information. I believe the unemployment department isn't reporting information as accurately as they "should." In fact, as the last bout of unemployment offerings came to an end about two months ago, in Oregon, it was suddenly reported that there were less people claiming unemployment and that was a good sign. WHAT? NO IT IS NOT! There were less people, because those who've been unemployed for a year or longer are now without ANY source of income, are not reporting unemployment because it's run out, and are STILL unemployed, and now in a financially desperate situation!!
 
Look, I'm not saying to be gloom, doom and despair! But I'm also saying - DON'T lie! Lying will not help anyone. Icing the cake, if the cake is made of poo, will NOT make the cake any better - it's STILL poo!! DUHH!? And, what about this shooting at the Holocaust Memorial Museum? A shooting - of a 'black,' security guard, by a white supremicist (supposedly), took place during a 'shoot-out,' which this terrible, hate-monger started. Seems pretty, well - 'black and white,' - doesn't it? Hmm... maybe not so for those of us that recognized the underlying concern: it was the holocaust museum. For those of you who have never been to one (and there are SEVERAL - for some reason - around the country), I can assure you, it is a reminder about how bad "white" Americans are. Am I being racist? No, in fact, I'm exactly the opposite, since it's the museum that is racist. If it was purely about the holocaust victims in WWII, then that would be pretty straight forward and without question. Why should it raise a red flag? Because: THE HOLOCAUST VICTIMS WERE WHITE JEWS. How is it, that a "white supremicist," has a problem with, "white jews?"
 
So, once you read the story (from ABC as linked above), you find out that there are several, including a "man," that stated that the shooter, Von Brunn (of course, German...) was a "pressure cooker," waiting to explode, and had, "underlying anger issues," and another clarified that Von Brunn was just, "crazy." Yes, for those of you asking the right questions, these were NOT experts, NOT his friends and NOT even people acquainted with Von Brunn in any other way than a rare, maybe once-per-year, quick, "hello." Let me add something else for you: Von Brunn was 88 YEARS OLD - and apparently, they claim that the election of a "black" president spawned his anger. Really? You mean, that Von Brunn, who is old enough to actually have lived THROUGH the holocaust, who had his social security cut, is unable to survive, walked into a holocaust museum, where MILLIONS of dollars supporting the propogation of hatred of Germans and White Americans is blasted (and if you've been in there - and your brain works - you know - that it's not just a tribute to those who suffered - which even I would support - but a segregasit, left-wing sponsored, liberal place to hate white people), upset because he could no longer survive, was losing his home and everything he'd worked for since the newly elected President put STIMULUS money from OUR taxes into holocaust museums while the elderly suffer, and brought a gun?
 
Yes. Did he plan on killing people? Nope. In fact, had it been one of the "white" guards that was shot - ABC might not have even let this story take a lead page (sorry - but racism is rampant in today's media, too). Von Brunn committed the well-known act of: Death by Cop (or in this case, security guard). Think about it - 88 years old - and a security guard, if Von Brunn was raising cain, could not have detained him? Remember what the article says - the other "guards" - (as in more than one), returned fire. It was Von Brunn vs. the museum's security guards. One, little old man alone - upset that our government is causing us to fall into misery - was ready to die. But, now, the black security guard is a hero and Von Brunn's going to go down in history as just a "crazy" old man. ABC reported that onne person who didn't even KNOW Von Brunn at all, knew there was reason to be concerned when Von Brunn gave away his computer and website, because people who give away precious things are usually at the end of their rope.
 
Really? I mean, a computer? Sorry, didn't know that was, 'precious/' And, he gave his website, which was obviously driven by racism, to someone who took it down. He didn't care to keep up the fight (that he thought was right) anymore. That's not "precious," it's not an heirloom, and it's most certainly NOT an indicator that Von Brunn was ready to die. Everything else in the article - that is - the FACTS about what Von Brunn was losing under this new administration - ARE reasons to have believed he was ready to die. And, of course, it was reported that white, hate groups are on the rise, and that it's a tragedy when white people are pushed because they'll snap. You mean, like in the Watts Riots? Or, maybe the South Central riots? Or, perhaps the Taliban? Oh wait - NONE of those folks are white - so isn't it more like - when ANYONE is pushed, they snap? And, what was Von Brunn doing? Yeah - he was saying on his website that he felt the time for talk was over, it was time to take action. Didn't we have an issue with an oriental student (born in America - identifying him by race for clarity), posted on web sites and to news stations for months his intentions to shoot college students, and when people ignored him, he did? Is that to say they should have raided Von Brunn? Of course not - the FBI raid people because they download music and upset Corporate America, not because they care about a few human lives...
 
Of course, Von Brunn was misguided. What he thought was a Federally managed conspiracy of Jews controlling our monetary system and government for the purpose of destroying white people, actually has much stronger ties to the Illuminati.... Okay - NON debatable points aside - the money is controlled by the government. The current budget threatens the very fabric of our economy. As I had posted yesterday for me, a Supreme Court Justice with a well-known prejudice in favor of Hispanics is using the race-card to gain support for her appointment and the President of this Country used it for his election. Is there a problem? Yes. Misguided as Von Brunn may have been, skewed by years of hatred (which obviously leads to the dark side....), at least saw the forest, just not the trees through the forest. Heck, Von Brunn wanted to place the Federal Reserve Board under legal, NON VIOLENT (hmm... sort of.. contradictory.. isn't it?), arrest for treason against our people. He claims to have been punished for the posts he made (sounds familiar.. where have I heard that before.. oh yeah - every radio show host crying out against the Fairness Doctrine for being attacked against freedom of speech and even myself currently being a victim of the same attack),
 
Finally, the sadness of all of this. The security guard (and it doesn't MATTER what the color of his skin is), was a father and family man. Good, bad or indifferent, a child will suffer from this. The people are trying to rise to anarchy, they are trying to speak out against the abuses of our economy and social lives by the Government. But, they are arrested, thrown in jail and left with fear tactics as the force against them. They are frightened - and when a frightened person - no matter their beliefs, is cornered - there will be consequences. I feel for Mr. Von Brunn, who wanted to leave this world, and if he doesn't, will pay a very serious price for this by the government. I feel for the guard, who paid a price already for his choice to be in a position that leads by fear. And, I feel for the people who did nothing when they heard this story.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sonia Sotomayor - the race card

Posted by CyberMom on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:58:34 PM
This is a mixed issue for me as I believe there are important issues surrounding the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice, but only the most pointless of debates - as it was with Clarence Thomas - are underway (so far) - and while I have no doubts that she will be elected to the Supreme Court (nobody says no to Mr. President!), there are a few issues that I feel are worthy of addressing. The first issues are not conspiracy theory or some 'corruption' of justice, but issues brought forth by her supporters that need to be re-evaluated:

Mrs. Sotomayor's dealings with diabetes - DO NOT matter to her being on the Supreme Court. That is a human-sensitive issue meant to gain sympathy in her favor and is inappropriate in the Judicial system when evaluating a person based on qualifications - not who feels sorry for her. This is not Mrs. Sotomayor's fault, but the fault of the President, and others, who have felt it was a point of consideration for appointing her.

Mrs. Sotomayor's "Hispanic" origin as a point of consideration for appointing her is both disgusting to me as a fellow brother under the Lord, and appalling as an advocate of equal rights for all people WITHOUT discrimination. But, I suppose that Obama played the African American card like it was an Ace, why not have racial issues in the selection of a supreme court justice, too? And yes people - it is a racial point based on the same 'human-sensitive' platform that I discussed previously.

Mrs. Sotomayor's saving of baseball is another, blatant abuse by her supporters (the President amongst them, who felt that was an important addition to his introduction speech about her - when he couldn't even REMOTELY pronounce her name right - George bush anyone - calling her Sadamiyer (sounds like sodomizer without the z??) - which truthfully degraded every other good thing he had to say by bringing 'baseball,' in as a key point of electing judicial officials to the Supreme Court?) - this point should not even be brought up. She did NOT "save" baseball. She is not a "hero," and saving baseball is not a hard hitting issue that really equates to something such as... the death penalty. And, if you don't get that - and aren't on death row - you don't get to comment.

Mrs. Sotomayor's subtle attempts at dismissing appeals court experience was an example of her lack of experience in a formal, public setting. The truth is - the Constitution does not stand. Contentions to the Constitution do NOT come from those trying to break the law - they come from PROSECUTORS, pushing past the boundaries set by the Constitution to incriminate anyone they can for money, and it is the responsibility of appeals court justices to rule when brought to their attention. It's vital - VITAL to note - that the justice system does NOT rest upon the standards of the Constitution, but upon caselaw and precedence. I was actually glad to see a judge with this type of experience, available to replace the same judge on the Supreme Court (and from the news said - I have no verification on this- the ONLY one) with that type of experience. For Mrs. Sotomayor to dismiss it and try to ease into it with, "I know..." was not wholly appropriate. Yes, we "know," you "know," the truth is that the Constitution is being negated - but that's not what you were being asked!! ARGH!

Enter: America's Worst Media Reporters.

Robert Lovato: "Sotomayor should remember it's not she who is on trial, but the Republican party." He goes on to say that it will be a test of the Republican party to see if they're ready to renew the fundamental principals of justice. WHAT?? What principals? The ones whereby Sotomayor has experience as an appeals judge and the Constitution does not need to stand as law? I'm pretty sure, that's NOT a fundamental principal of justice. Maybe he's talking about pre-constitution times when English Jurisprudence still ruled the land and we had things like the Salem Witch Trials? Of course.. that's what's going on in the justice system today for those who have had the whereforall to watch the news....

Well, thank goodness the Democrats who are in control of Congress have something reasonable to say, like Senator Patrick Leahy, who tells us that it's good that Sotomayor is Hispanic because that will better reflect "equal justice under law." WHAT?? So - are you saying that Sotomayor being Hispanic means she will better handle the Hispanic community? Does that mean that the Supreme Court is expecting a lot of Hispanic people to now be brought before them (and is therefore a racist comment)? Does that mean the other judges, white, oriental and black are racist? Wouldn't that mean that Sotomayor as a Hispanic would be biased against a white? See how this is a STUPID issue that does NOT belong here. And, yet - it IS the consideration of many in Congress, for Sotomayor's appointment. Sorry to say, but even if she is qualified, she now has to be discounted or else we continue to push the issue of segregation in America further.

Perhaps Jennifer Donahue has offered valuable insight by stating that Justice Thomas' statement that he was a victim of a 'high-tech lynching' was the end of a miscarriage of justice against poor, Clarence Thomas? Perhaps, Ms. Donahue's very first coverage of a Supreme Court appointment was about as worthless to her career as 'valuable insight,' as her current article on the Sotomayor debate is to ... um.. reality? Justice Thomas' statement was a racist slam in his favor. There was no, "high tech," involved, he was playing the race card, in hopes of saving face, to "lynch," the Supreme Court and the GOP into a forced appointment lest they now become biggots. She believes the Republicans are only putting up a fight to, "keep the base happy," and maybe she's right. But, then again, maybe Clarence Thomas wasn't playing the race card and was really being threatened with a good, ol' fashion, southern-style lynchin'!! And, maybe - America can quit acting like stupid sheeple and recognize stupidity for what it is - stupidity.

The point is this: while it's been stated that Sotomayor has more experience in her pre-Supreme Court Justice status than any of the others had who currently serve when they were in the same position, less is being said about her qualifications and more about playing a race card, a human-sensitive/sympathy card and a pressure card against Republicans. Why? It would be a waste of space to repost the many concerns here, so I'll reference them for your reading:

The Case Against Sotomayor

Sotomayor's Judicial Record Could be a Battlefield for Critics: "Judge Sotomayor will need to reassure the country that she will set aside her biases, uphold the rule of law and interpret the Constitution as written, not as she believes it should have been written.." (didn't Senator Leahy state that he supported her equal justice stance???? doesn't that seem like he has NO CLUE what he's doing either??)

Sotomayor and Race

Why these issues? Why not just flat out attack Sotomayor, or support Sotomayor for her judicial qualifications? Because, these are the cards that a race-card President and race-card, Democrat President played, and they know it worked. The people voted for it, gave it support like ignorant sheep, and now they're seeing the fruits of their ignorance. Why race? Because I HATE race topics. Race topics SEGREGATE this country, and our people, and are NOT AMERICAN. What to do now? Again, I'll re-emphasize, that I have no doubt that the non-Constitutional issues - NON CONSTITUTIONAL - standards - upon which Sotomayor is being judged, will pressure the Senate into supporting her. I have no doubt that YOUR elected officials (not mine - I DIDN'T vote for them), will fail you, as representatives of YOUR best interest. However, there will be consequences from this decision as well - and we won't get to see the full ramifications of those consequences, I'm afraid, until it's too late. Remember - the Supreme Court is a LIFE position - who we put on now - will be there FOR LIFE - not 2 years, not 4 years - but more like - THIRTY OR FOURTY! We can't make half-cooked decisions from half-summed up information. The vote for a Supreme Court Justice official is a vote of grave importance. What I feel should have been addressed:

  • Her support for or against the Constitution (especially as an appeals court judge).
  • Her support for or against (or knowledge or lack of knowledge of) the 30% of prison population being INNOCENT and not being afforded their rights.
  • Her support for or against (or knowledge or lack of knowledge of) the failure for effective, indigent defense, the failure to hold prosecutors accountable or responsible, the corruption running rampant in law enforcement.

These would have been worthy issues upon which Sotomayor could have stood. Now, it's too late. Now, we're going to see this happen, and we - the people - the ones who make up this country and will be affected by EACH AND EVERY decision this woman makes (including decisions supported by pressure from special interest groups such as the Latino group), will realize, too late, what segregation will do to our Country.

A house divided CAN NOT STAND.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Review: The Glenn Beck Comedy Tour - 10 out of 10

Posted by CyberMom on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:24:31 PM
(Yes - this blog's dedicated to government lies - and I tend to break the rules too often and stray from it - but Glenn Beck's pretty close to right on the money with this topic anyway.. so here goes - I'll rate this in the way I use to rate movies when I did so on another, old blog, using the good, the bad and the ugly!)
 

First - my rating: For a comedy show of this nature (explained in detail below), I give this a 10 out of 10 - and for anyone who has ever read my reviews, they can most assuredly tell you, I tend to be exceedingly harsh, use very strict criteria and will rarely, if EVER, even rate a 9/10 - even on comedy tours!!
 
The Good:
 
The Glenn Beck, "Common Sense," Comedy Tour aired live, last Thursday. It was my brother's birthday, I didn't have any money to do anything for him, and when the radio DJ announced the ticket giveaway on KBND - I didn't even bat an eyelash. I had heard the DJ talk about it and immediately began to pull off the road, my hand on the cell phone - I dialed - and I won! Woohoo! Two free tickets to Glenn Beck! YES! (although I appreciated the tickets, I'm sure Glenn appreciates the money generated from them, too!)!... Wait, my brother "wasn't" (although he is now, having seen the show), a Glenn Beck listener. I thought, "Oh man, great - I got him something that he'll be appreciative for because he's a good guy, but I'm sure won't really enjoy - great brother I am!" Boy, was I wrong. My brother laughed throughout and enjoyed the entire show (except for his confusion on the Whoopie Goldberg issue - and explaining it "after the fact," didn't much add to the comedy therein. Glenn Beck put himself before the world to be judged, and he delivered. The value of his show far exceeded the cost of any tickets (and turned out to be of extreme value and worth to my brother - which was awesome!).
 
So, I went, excited to see the 'live' showing (broadcast across more than 430 theaters I believe?), hoping to catch 'Glenn' when he makes any mistakes or trip-ups (when you enjoy someone's work, and you understand their value in what they do - and you mean it in GOOD humor - you might tend to find yourself looking for the little mistakes here and there for added, comedic value), hoping to have a laugh or two - and I was NOT disappointed. Mind you, as for a "comedy" show, it wasn't "chalk" full of humor - but let's face it, Glenn is Glenn, not Robin Williams, and he can't be held to the same standard (I suppose that goes along with the whole, 'common sense,' theme as well...). And, toward the last, maybe 30 - 45 minutes, Glenn really broke from the 'animated,' and 'lively,' routine he had been doing to become very preachy. Mind you, as a Glenn Beck fan, I enjoy his common sense banter and appreciate his insightful views into our current, political climate; so I was not put off by this at all. It even worked - in part - to 'wind' down the audience.
 
In fact, my brother turned to me at one point during the broadcast and asked, "They [the audience] do know that he [Glenn] can't hear them, right?" Of course, he was referring to the clapping and cheers coming from within OUR theater! What I thought was of key notice, was that the audience (full house) was filled primarily with an older generation of people. What that said to me was, the people who have been through this, the people who have been around and seen this Country's ups and downs, the people who are wizened and experienced, have come here seeking more insight (and humor - Glenn is a very animated character, and watching him is definitely entertaining). What does that say for Glenn's show? Well, I could spout on all day about my opinions of it, but I think the last two points I made speak for themselves: An audience of wizened and knowledgeable people, clapping and cheering at what they were watching, who found value and entertainment all-in-one! These are not teen-agers with self-indulgent values. These are not college-aged students with mixed, 'clueless' causes. And, these are not the same people that rush off to the Robin Williams comedy tour expecting some vulgarity, constant, outrageous humor and laughs galore (yes, Robin's awesome, too!).
 
These are folks who know what they're doing. A good portion of the audience included the middle to older working class - responsible Americans with high values. These are sensible, no-nonsense people who see that something's wrong in this country, and they are looking for confirmation, or an explanation, of what's going on. And, they got what they came for - as did I. Not only did I seek knowledge from Mr. Beck, but I sought confirmation of what I knew to be going on, and it was there. Albeit, it was appropriately mixed in with enough humor to keep me laughing through most of the show. Another factor to consider, is that Glenn is addressing a highly-sensitive, and not-so-funny topic. Thusly, I would more likely rate him against a comedian such as Chris Titus. Titus addresses not-so-funny, and often times difficult issues in a manner that will keep you laughing, and yet, he still gets his point across (at times...). Glenn, not only did the same, but he addressed a topic of grave concern to all of America, and did so in a VERY, unbiased and [generally] non-partisan manner. That is what I REALLY appreciate about his work - it is such an unbelievably refreshing approach that this alone, makes his entire show worthwhile. He brings everything to the table. He does not generally tend to make half-cocked statements (note my previous blogs putting the responsibility onto the listeners to confirm facts and information for THEMSELVES) like so many other talk show hosts do, having only half the knowledge. This is the type of insight that has value. This is the type of input that "educates," people.
 
What was the major theme? Well, um, common sense, of course? I suppose that should have been, "common sense," to those who read the title of his tour. However, what common sense? The common sense not to stick your finger in the light socket (ie Titus)? No - the common sense to not let life continue passing us by, ignorant to the continuing decline of our government, which is reflected at an exponentially, much worse level in our economy, social lives, education and other areas of political/public crossover (a line which is very much becoming harder and harder to distinguish). Some people - will NOT like his show. Some people will not like what Glenn says because it's "true," or because it's "not funny enough," or because it's too "preachy." For whatever excuse someone makes for not liking it, in the words of Lincoln: You can't please all of the people, all of the time (a variant, of course, on 'fooling' the people as was actually said by Lincoln). For the rest of us, those that are looking for a good time, a quality show, valuable entertainment, enlightening knowledge, intelligent insight and equal and ACCURATE representation of the problems facing America today: This is the show to see. 
 
The Bad:
 
A lot of preaching. It was like listening to Glenn's radio show (except this had a lot more humor, less interruptions and lively, animations from Glenn himself). That's hard on some people. It's the same for the poor folks who actually take the time to read my long-winded blogs - people read newspapers because articles are pithy - but these topics are not pithy topics - the points that have to be made can't be done in a few sentences, and in order to get the point across in a fair and impartial manner - it takes more space and time. So, the show went on in very LONG paths to try and make its points (again, albeit a necessary path). Otherwise, there was not really anything bad to say (as you can tell, I'm the 'old white party,'... hahaha... because the other side will have a LOT of negative to say, I'm sure), but for the sake of equal representation of good and bad, I'll add what I can:
 
The wig left on stage by Glenn was an annoying distraction. The audience member with his first beer was an annoying distraction (Glenn recovered VERY well - obviously a seasoned comedian who knows his gig because, as Bob and Tom note, the best comedians can be rated upon how they take the heckling of the audience). A couple of nitpicky items - when referring to Paul Revere, Glenn said: Benjamin Franklin (I believe), and when addressing the audience, he switched between Missouri and Kansas - so I felt a little out of place in Oregon!
 
The Whoopie joke was good - and added to the emphasis that Glenn made when finally discussing the 'real,' Whoopie Goldberg, but for those who didn't know the joke in advance, or weren't that interested in it, it drug on a little too much. It was a great insider joke for the Glenn Beck staff I'm sure, and it was awesome to know that "the View," was having conniption fits (I'm assuming that info btw), but it was hit on a little, too much. Leaving the audience members on stage while he did his "in-betweens," (referring to periods in between interacting with the people) that were necessary for the whole explanation (and it was the MOST brilliant example, to date, I've seen for a visual explanation of freedom), was a bit tedious to watch. I felt sorry for them after a while (that is, the face of the poor, confused girl just standing on stage made you feel sorry for her and think - c'mon Glenn - get it over with - they're dying up there!!). Finally, it's frightening how much Glenn and I are alike in our communication styles whether we are in agreement or not: we're both VERY easily sidetracked, and that can lead to a LOT of redundancy and lag!
 
The Ugly:
 
This one's easy - (ha, ha, ha - no - not the outfit!!): Glenn constantly referred to the importance of the American people 'waking up,' and 'fighting back,' against the system. I feel he did a brilliant job showing us just how the system is wrong and what needs to be changed (ie. throwing the whole cast and crew of American politics OUT the door), but what I feel was missed is an important point that I am going to go out on a limb here and state that I personally "believe," is what Glenn is trying to say without saying it (only because his views and mine are **almost** exactly parallel, especially in what he and I see coming):
 
As Glenn stated: we have to fight back. It's not enough to stand up. We HAVE to stop voting when our only two choices are 'bad,' and 'worse.' We HAVE to stop obeying stupid laws that are designed to harm us. But, how do we do that? I feel that the legal predicament I'm currently in originates from having expressed my solution in a previous blog when it was I who was writing (vs. now - with another who interfaces with the pc and writes for me - even if it's still my words). I stated that our fighting back can only come in one fashion - and that's where Glenn's "anarchy" vs. "king/empire," example comes in. Moving in between the two requires that anarchy also exists. There's no anarchy right now. There's no rebellion. People are afraid. Glenn spoke about the politicians threatening to cut the police and schools - but, in part, he was wrong. In most states, they've ramped up the police force - because they want to keep the people scared. Rebelling, in the current system, means cops hauling you off to jail or prison or even - falsely incriminating you and hurting the innocent (the peaceful, sit-down protest at Kent State anyone?). The real 'home-land' terrorist threat comes from within, not without - I'm sorry to say. But, I'll digress on any further opinions from me, and simply say that, the ugly is that there is now a riled up group of people (who will be joined when the show is re-broadcast, and if you haven't seen it - I'm recommending it to you!!), with nowhere to go. And, that's when that no-government, no-leadership, DANGEROUS, anarchy sets in...
 
The people need a leader, and after watching Mr. Beck's oratory skills; hearing his knowledge, wisdom and insight; and seeing that he has seen the dark corners that I have too; maybe he should put back on the founding fathers' suit and take charge (or was that a subliminal message to do that anyway? HAHAHAHAHAHA!).
 
Now, stop reading and go see it. Go on. Why are you still reading? I don't care if it's not playing yet - get off of here and go buy tickets - then go sit and wait for it! Sheesh!! Computers are bad for you anyway!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

When schools fail, children suffer

Posted by CyberMom on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 11:55:44 AM
Oh people - how do I put this to you in a way that doesn't sound so disgusting that we would rejoice at the financial devastation the schools have suffered with this current economy crisis? Let's see - I think we'll start by addressing what I believe is the foundation of education:
 
It is my personal belief, as the grandson of a highly credited and honored teacher of younger children, that the entire purpose for the education system is to offer our children the opportunity to advance their lives, starting from the point where ours come to an end.
 
Confusing? Let me 'splain - no, that would take to long, let me sum it up: Rather than reinvent the wheel from scratch, rediscover electricity, or repeat historical disasters, an education should be designed so that, by the time our children graduate and are prepared to head out into the world, they will have a foundation of knowledge upon which to build. So, instead of cutting rocks until they're shaped like a tire, they can take the rubbery treads and try to make something better. Instead of hooking a key to a kite string to determine the foundation for electricity, they can take the knowledge they've gained and design renewable energy sources and advance electrical production in a way to help all the world. And, instead of recreating the events of the world that involve war, death, famine and other atrocities, they can develop a better life for themselves.
 
But, the day that the government took over the education system, applied 'lottery' monies as the source for financial support and developed an educational standard that is substandard to the rest of the entire (non 3rd world countries) world, is the day we let down our children. I present to you this article:
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31131902/: School cancels graduation ceremony to teach cheaters a lesson.
 
Now, let's reanalyze just the title of that article: the school, the educational institution whose obligation and duty is to our children and the betterment of their lives, cancels the 'ceremonial,' rite of passage (Joseph Campbell insert here!!), that seniors go through before heading out into the world, to teach cheaters - students who broke the rules of the curriculum - a lesson (you know - lesson - as in what the school should have been providing students PRIOR to the graduation ceremonies). So, is it just me, or does that make you wonder how an ENTIRE, senior graduating class cheated? Wait a second - they didn't!! That's right - a select "few" cheated. And, as is customary for the school systems of today, rather than hold the students who did this responsible (because we wouldn't want to teach students accountability or responsibility as that would just be a silly thing to pass on before they head into the world), they are punishing everyone. In fact, part of the school's justification for this is because they "believe" (again, their all-knowing 'perceptiveness') that other seniors knew about it and didn't report it. Well, thank goodness the schools are failing to teach the importance of holding guilty students responsible, but holding those who don't feel they should betray their fellow men to the authorities for something as *gasp* terrible as cheating, because, otherwise - it might make it more reasonable that we also allow these same schools to teach our children about s - e - x!!
 
But, let's step back for a moment.. shall we? One of the tests that was cheated on (again, they 'believe) was: Early Aztec Indian History. WHAT? Wait up! Hold up, homie G. Step back, my brother. You mean that these HORRIBLE, terrible, out of control seniors DARED try to step into the modern world, amongst their fellow men, having failed to fully grasp the actual facts behind EARLY AZTEC INDIAN HISTORY? How DARE THEY! After all - the history books in schools are so accurate that - EVERY YEAR - they have to be modified to include new and updated facts!! But, let's not dwell on the point of teaching inaccurate information and focus on what's important - knowing when the aztecs planted maize in the fields vs. when they developed their ancient calendars! WoHO! These students are definitely OUT OF CONTROL!.....
...
Okay - I'm sure I'm just being silly here. Because, truthfully, we all know the REAL reason the school is upset - right? Because the students lied! I'm sure that's it! As Superintendent Holden stated, it was impossible for the school to separate the "wheat from the chaff," amongst the cheaters, non-whistleblowers and.. oh yeah.. those students who had gotten to the end by working hard. So, Holden has held to the Biblical principal - don't try to tear out the bad wheat, or you'll accidentally pull the good wheat with it (parable of Our Lord, Jesus the Christ)!! Of course, Holden and the others have failed to acknowledge that you're supposed to actually then harvest the WHOLE field and afterward separate out the bad wheat (aka - do the ceremony and then let those that cheated fail - although, I'm not sure how their cheating in world cultures or AZTEC INDIAN HISTORY, is going to cause them life failures - I know it's helped me out so many times - when watching JEAPARODY!!). Well, of course, there's also the Biblical principal that you can't know what's in the heart of another - only your own - and without FACTS - without WITNESSES - without the ACTUAL EVIDENCE - you can only assume - and therefore - CAN NOT PASS JUDGMENT. But, Holden and the others - you know - the superintendent, principals and teachers who are all supposed to be highly educated - seem to have MISSED that part of THEIR world cultures studies!!
 
But folks, this is NOT what I'm upset about. Oh no - this is not even the BEST of the story. You see, the best part of this story is about to come - the part where the school must hang its head in SHAME, where the ENTIRE school district must be put to the utmost scrutiny and punished for this. Why? Well, I know many of you are still feeling that the school is justified. Many of you are still believing the school is in the right because we shouldn't let cheaters through - even if it's only for world cultures and stupid information that's not going to help the non-future archaeologists - even if it means punishing the innocent along with the guilty (and yes -the innocent are punished when their rite of passage - a VITAL part of growing up and the ENTIRE point of working hard in school is to achieve success and feel the good effects of their accomplishment through that Rite). So, let me point out the painfully obvious that, thus far, has apparently been missed:
 
The school didn't "catch," the cheaters. Oh no - the school "noticed" HIGHER THAN EXPECTED GRADES - and it brought to their attention the potential for cheating. STOP! HOLD ON - and let's rethink this. "Higher - than - expected - grades." So... the school noticed that students were getting high grades and this was concern for cheating? Well, I mean - of course, why not? After all, we wouldn't expect our students in American schools to actually be getting good grades, right? It's just silly to believe that students might be doing good - or that the TEACHERS ARE DOING THEIR JOBS!! Okay - who's lost? Who doesn't get the point I just made? Those of you that are missing this - get up - go wash your face off with cold water - and re-read the article, especially the part about the parents holding their own ceremony and the school not being welcome. Reread the part about one student having the test and still failing - and that this is one of the highest, academically rated schools in the state!!
 
Just remember - because it is one of the highest rated schools, wouldn't mean much if the graduating grade-level of a high-school senior is less than the fourth grade (no, that's not an insult to the students - but to the educators and the system teaching them). The students were SO disinclined to care about world cultures, so unmotivated by their teachers - so worried about a teacher who obviously likes to make the "tough" tests that they feared they wouldn't pass - that they cheated. Do students cheat because it's easy? Maybe - but fear and guilt always play a factor in that equation - such as fear of not knowing info on the final - so the usual answer is - NO. Students cheat when they're worried about their grades, about not passing - because - whether it's their fault or the teacher's - they didn't get the information. Now, not knowing the teaching style in the classroom, here's the only thing I can say, and the point of all of this:
 
THE SCHOOL FAILED. Not the students who cheated or didn't "whistleblow," but the SCHOOL. Cheaters don't cheat others, they cheat themselves. Their going through the rite of passage would have been empty and unfulfilling and they would have been the ones to suffer for it (well, if we were talking about reading or math, albeit ANCIENT Aztec history is SO vital to getting a job at some big company like ... Congress). The school is withholding the ceremonial graduation because they are EMBARRASSED! They are humiliated. They are.. wait.. stupid. Why? Because - they could have held the graduation ceremony and notified the parents of the cheaters and not invited them. Wait - haven't schools done that in the past? Isn't that what happens for a student who doesn't graduate? Why, yes, it is!! The school could have kept this under the carpet, protected the HARD WORKING, deserving students (because those world cultures cheaters are so terribly bad!!), and maintained the ceremonial graduation and SAVED FACE in light of having had to realize that there were cheaters amongst them when their students, in their "highly accredited" school got good grades............. (sorry.... have to pause again as I am dumbfounded by the sheer ignorance of the school in making that public.........), and still operated in the fashion that a low-grade, poor-quality, American school usually does.
 
Folks - this is not a travesty - this is an absolute failure of the system. This is so degrading that it reeks of filth and putrescence. I am so disgusted by this, that my grandmother is rolling over in her coffin. If one of her students was struggling, if she thought that they felt the need to cheat, one on one, she would step up to the plate, talk with their parents, and try to help. My son's school will call me if they feel there are issues that my child is having, and open the lines of communication (expecting, as they should, that I as his dad should be responsible for my own child), to help my child succeed. They don't just assume he's stupid and should get bad grades - like the ENTIRE education system in OHIO! Ohio residents should be outraged. They should be terminating the ENTIRE school board system - and let them see what it means to punish the innocent with the guilty - then rehire the ENTIRE staff, weeding out the idiots. You see - the problem is that - the schools are not just failing in what level of education they provide, they are failing in how they operate:
 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,172416,00.html: Long Island School cancels prom, doesn't want to support orgy
 
Should I even bother? Should I even bother to tell you why this is wrong, and how wrong it is? Do you not understand? Yes - the parents that are supporting a pre-prom cocktail party are WRONG - and they should have to be dealt with. The police can sit outside wherever these students are having their party, raid it and make bank (as they were probably planning anyway). But, the school doesn't want to support an "orgy." First off - just publishing that is WRONG. These are young minds who have obviously been swayed toward the degraded, low-end of the evolutionary ladder. Do we need to call their prom an "orgy?" Are we not encouraging MORE of this behavior? The school is right not to support this - I agree. NO ONE should support participating in ANY activity which degrades a child, no matter the circumstance. Is a graduation ceremony for a "potential" cheater, degrading? No - not at all - it's their cross to bear and a disgusting treatment of the hard working students - but so is cancelling a prom that the parents are the wealthy ones sponsoring, and will sponsor anyways!! The kids are going to Disneyland to stay in hotels together without ANY adult supervision?
 
The REAL problem? The school cancels the prom because, under THEIR supervision - THEIR guidance (and sorry Kellenberg Memorial PRIVATE high school - but it is YOUR responsibility what takes place AT and DURING the prom), that Brother Hoagland (yes - "BROTHER" as in MAN OF THE CLOTH) felt had turned into an orgy. But, wait - that's not true. "During" the prom, while the students stand in a gym and dance, they are monitored. Oh no - hold on, my bad - the school has been letting them rent out some big house and hold the prom there, unsupervised, where the kiddies are fed alcohol - even though one of the parents thinks it SUCKS that THEIR good student, that they have helped instill with morals, shouldn't be TALLIED in with the guilty and FALSELY labeled and alcoholic and drug addict. So - who failed, the students? Yes, in part - because they are not so ignorant enough to understand that societal norms don't support their raging hormones getting themselves pregnant as teenagers. Did society? Oh - big time - I can't even begin to say this enough.... Did the parents? Yeah - if every time you give your kid money, peer pressure leads them to go buy alcohol or drugs - STOP giving them MONEY - duh (at least the parents said they're relieved and glad that the schools morals are "saving" them - not the kids - but the parents, from contributing to their child's delinquency....?? um.. what? What IDIOT said this? How did they become a parent? How have they managed to actually survive up until now without walking off the edge of a well-marked cliff-side?)? Did the school - YES. YES. and.. um, YES.
 
What takes place after the prom- that's NOT the school's responsibility. What takes before the prom - is not the school's either. If it's an alcohol issue - I'm sure that the Sheriff's department would have more than gladly (and probably delighted in it as they are sadistic), stood at the door and offered the 'quick-check' alcohol breath strip, if the teachers were too afraid to. Then - the kids with the responsibility and maturity level of a dog in heat - could have been kept out.
 
Finally, what does this all mean? What is the point of my long-winded banter? (hey - it's a blog - not a newspaper article!!). It means, that when the school has options to consider holding students accountable and responsible, yet fails to do so - it hurts the students. When a school punishes the innocent, it teaches them their hard work and efforts were for nothing and it hurts the students. It teaches the 'stray' kids that they can keep doing what they're doing and let the innocent take the fall. It means that these people are setting BAD examples for our children. It means these people have no idea what the purpose and value of an education is. School is MORE than just reading books - it's opening your mind. Of course - the school in New York has taught one valuable lesson - they're not going to keep letting history repeat itself - just only after it's happened over and over and over again and didn't "self resolve," magically. Hmm... I wonder if that's not the same, ignorant standard that the world leaders used when they ignored Hitler after he took one country... then another... then another... the problem not resolving itself, until finally, they took a stand. Hey - I guess history DOES repeat itself!! And, the school DID fail to teach a valuable lesson...
 
No... wait.. that's not good.. is it? Good luck!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Nancy Pelosi - telling the truth finally

Posted by CyberMom on Monday, May 18, 2009 2:47:50 PM
Yes, Nancy Pelosi is the victim of her own moral standards. She was not meant for politics. In fact, I feel quite bad for Ms. Pelosi at the moment in time and wish there was some way I could help her. And, yet, with all she's done that has been egregious toward the people of this Country, it's a fact that she is at the receiving end of what she helped contribute to. Why? More of her outrageous commentary? No - in fact - it's because she's finally being honest. She's finally telling people the truth, and now, nobody will believe the little boy who cried wolf....
 
You see, Ms. Pelosi did NOT lie when she said that members of our 'intelligence' agencies (the CIA, the FBI, Internal Affairs, etc.) lie to Congress. When Newt Gingrich, ex Speaker of the House, spoke on the Sean Hannity show saying that Nancy Pelosi was undermining and attacking the innocent and pure "intelligence" agencies of this country and berated her, HE LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Why? How? Because - If - IF - Nancy Pelosi is telling the truth, then guess what? That means that old Newt knew the truth as well. In fact, it is HIS integrity that is on the line, not the integrity of our "intelligence," agencies. Quite frankly, the words government and intelligence are not only oxymorons, but rather strange bedfellows. What really makes this a 'major' issue that has unleashed such a horrid attack on Nancy Pelosi (and for those of you desensitized to the media - the attacks are outrageously extreme in comparison to ANYTHING else going on right now), is that it also puts 'Ex-Senator,' Mr. Barrack Obama, the current President - on the line for also knowing the truth about the lies AND contributing to it. You see - there's evidence. Not just the Guantanamo Bay garbage, but SO much more -
 
(I'll reflect on only a select 2 or 3 topics in this paper - as the FULL list would take a lifetime to present to you) 
 
When the Adam Walsh Act was initiated, its intentions seemed to be in support of the need to protect our children. However, there is a very dark and underlying agenda to this act. The American Prosecutor's Journal published a "guide" to understanding the Adam Walsh Act. It includes statements such as: "Prosecutors will find some very helpful language contained in the Congressional Findings..." and "Discoveries are not final appeable Orders," et. al. What does all that refer to? It refers to the prosecutors of this country, the D.A.'s that I wrote about previously who supposedly "support the Constitution," in full, relying on language in that bill that allows them to circumvent the Constitutional right for a Defendant to have access to all of the accusatory witnesses and accusatory instruments to be used against him or her. In fact, it outright limited and diminished the ability of any defense attorney to provide a Constitutionally adequate and sufficient defense. Of course, prosecutors love this. They are no longer bound by Constitutional laws protecting everyone. Don't misunderstand - you soccer mom, paranoid schizophrenics of the world out there - we're not talking about the rights of the guilty - only the accused. What's the difference? While you may be so insensitive that you don't care if a person's guilty or accused - you find guilt in everyone - like the good, God-fearing, loving, American you are...... what should scare the living crud out of you is that an innocent person no longer has the right to prove their innocence - and the guilty one continues to stalk the streets - and OUR children. Sorry, but unlike the ignorant masses of this country - I want the GUILTY person caught - because I can either accept that someone's potential innocence leaves a potentially guilty person walking free, or I can understand that jailing the wrong person (beyond our tax dollars going up), means the guilty ARE walking free!! BIG distinction. A chance and a risk I am willing to take,  is to allow someone freedom to represent their FULL innocence, so I can make sure that guilty person is still not walking around, unknown and free.
 
What does this have to do with Congress and intelligence agencies lying? They lie, and they use security officials, "intelligence" agencies to do so. One of the very first court cases (I forget the reference - I apologize) to occur following the institution of this act brought to light the fact that Congress declared hard disks inaccessible to defense experts at their place of business because they wanted to prevent the spread of such materials. However - as the Judge found out - NO such thing has ever occurred. And, he would not uphold a standard in his courtroom upon which lies predicated Congress' decision. You can read Dean Boland's technology blog to see for yourself additional violations of Congressional trust:
 
(2/26/09) "Although a study was released last month by the Internet Safety Technical Task Force that reported a safer Internet than parents and others had imagined. Nevertheless, two politicians from Texas, Jon Cornyn and Lamar Smith, have each filed in the senate and house, respectively, their own versions of the Internet Safety Act, otherwise known as Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth Act."

So - hold up - the ISTTF reported the internet's quite safe these days. So, what did these other two politicians do? They promoted free wire-tapping and forcing ISP's to keep permanent IP records of everyone. The consequences? IP records DON'T identify a person (go ahead google that phrase and see what you find). However, based on false information that is being presented to Congress - stop - go back - re-read "FALSE INFORMATION" - Congress must pass a law. Based on the presentation of the FBI to Congress that there is a risk of data loss if hard drives are given to defense, forensic experts, Congress must pass a law. Where's the "two-sides," to these arguments? Where's the Constitutionality? Well.. on that matter... I digress. Because, what's important here is evidence that "intelligence" sources have and ARE continuing to misrepresent data to Congress, falsely, and are causing laws to be irrationally initiated. So, where does the President/ex-Senator fit in? Mr. Obama claims his place of infamy in the "Protect Our Children First Act," which expanded upon the Adam Walsh Acts I & II, and further supported DHS' continuing removal of children from homes - even where children were never harmed, were quite safe and happy - and placing them into homes where they are lost, afraid and oft times are raped or abused (and in rare instances murdered).

Did our President want this? No, I don't believe he did. I believe he thought he was doing what was right based on the false information presented to him by DHS and federal authorities (who compiled false data from local law enforcement agencies), that allowed him to stir up Congress and win a feather in his cap for future elections.

But, when Governments lie - we suffer. Now, Nancy Pelosi, who has tried to tell the American public that lies were presented to Congress and Congress acted upon false information, initiating extreme actions that are potentially harmful in every way with every grain of cruelty and abuse that is Anti-American and UnConstitutional, is facing losing her job, her career, her credibility and so much more. Ms. Pelosi is trying to tell people the truth - but when the little boy who cries wolf does it over and over again, soon, no one will believe them. Well, Ms. Pelosi, as much as I am NOT in support of you maintaining your position in politics (unless you have learned something and will begin to sing a different tune), I do believe you and feel for you. I believe you - because the facts are out there. But, Congress doesn't want to be defaced. Newt Gingrich is scrambling to cover his tail in the wake of publishing his new book. The President doesn't need another bad mark on his record. So - you're the fall guy (or, er, um.. gal.. hee hee). You're the whipping boy, the scapegoat... the bobo doll! You are - at the receiving end of all the wild and outrageous verbal commentary you threw out against the American people. 

But, I fear that no one else will believe you. People believe their televisions. The pendulum swings in one direction, then the other - people go from one extreme to the other, and it takes a while to come back and yet, the pendulum does not stop in the middle. I'm afraid that no one but I, will defend you right now - and I am fairly right wing (surprisingly.. hmm?). I'm afraid that no one will aide you but me, right now, because you've not won the popular vote. You've not convinced the sheep they're in trouble. The sheep go where they're told, and trust what they're told. The little boy who cried wolf is the same one who lead his sheep to the slaughter. And, Ms. Pelosi - the sheep who are ignoring the truth about what you're telling them - will be lead to the slaughter. THEY WILL SUFFER, because of what you've done and what is happening now. They will NOT see the wolf coming, nor will anyone come to their aide. What you are now faced with is the devastation that a few misplaced, mistimed and unweighed words will have on the lives of the American people. The "intelligence" agencies will continue to lie. Congress will continue to issue out outrageous and uncalculated laws. Congress will violate the very Constitution of this country to initiate a witch hunt in the traditional style of the late 17th century and innocents will burn. But, only those who are sitting in are awaiting our cages, so that we may be held underwater for an hour to see if we come up breathing and are truly the witch we're accused of being, know the truth. And, we've been quieted. Nobody reads our work. Nobody listens to us. We have been defamed under false pretenses so that we no longer interrupt the wolf's feeding session.

And, now you know how it feels. Sorry -wish I could do more. Wish I knew how. Not solely to protect you - but mainly to protect the people.

 

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Waterboarding

Posted by CyberMom on Monday, May 18, 2009 1:54:30 PM
Waterboarding.. torture.. hmm...
 
Sure, it's wrong. Sure, it's justified. Sure it's... um, what?
 
Are we justified in resorting to the guerilla-style tactics of warfare to stop.. guerilla-style tactics of warfare? Are we better than our enemy if we act like our enemy?
 
Are we justified in defending ourselves when we commit the very acts which prompt our enemies to destroy us?
 
Yes - there is a rhyme and reason for terrorism. You may not agree. You may not like it. I don't. But, there is a purpose. They DO have an agenda, contrary to popular belief. Terrorists seek to harm others - creating 'terror' - because they have an agenda which justifies their actions. Whether it's religious, political or just hateful - it exists. Perhaps the Jihad are really out there to get us solely for religious reasons. In fact, if you read the article: Why do Muslims Hate us?, you can see some reasons (right or wrong), why extremists would want to destroy America. Does that give them a right? Most certainly not. They have NO more right to destroy us, than we do them! However, our current political atmosphere regarding "waterboarding," is 'get them before they get us!'
 
Whoa. WHOA! Hold up - this is the SAME premise that I've been arguing against the extreme power granted to law enforcement in America - which is "get them before they get us!" That is why there are over 1 MILLION innocent people in prison. That is why there are innocent people in THIS country - the country of 'freedom,' and 'democracy,' being tried, WHILE you read this, for crimes they did not commit. Predictive punishments. And, man - fear can cause us to do a lot of things. But, here's the catch - if you listen to talk show hosts like Dennis Miller, without having been a victim of 'waterboarding,' himself, he LOUDLY proclaims it as so menial that it doesn't qualify as torture. He claims to the people that we MUST protect ourselves and HATE those people who strap bombs to themselves to die.
 
Maybe he's right..... Maybe. I'm not in possession of any 'great' or superior knowledge that would prove to me he's right - OR - wrong. What I am in possession of though, are my mental faculties. Maybe, we should waterboard American citizens who 'look' scary because they're more likely to hurt someone if we don't confirm first, that they don't? Sound too extreme for an example? Well - how about this:
 
You torture someone to confirm that they are not going to plan an attack (whether you have "intel" supporting it or not). You expect an answer, correct? If they continue to say, "no," you continue to torture them. If they continue to say, "no," you continue to destroy their very soul. If they continue to say, "no," you bash and hurt and deprive and manipulate and control and deceive and damage until you get the TRUTH!
 
But, what is the truth? Is it, "no?" Because, if it is - you just falsely tortured an innocent person, destroying them in ways that no human being who has not suffered through massive pains, political pressures or torture could even possibly comprehend. What if they say, "yes," but the answer is really, "no?" Now - you've MANIFESTED an answer that doesn't exist. Maybe, you'd do well to read this article on torture: Star Trek Torture Episode. Maybe, just maybe, you might ask yourself - how far is too far. How much is too much? When is enough, enough? When are WE the enemy? Let's pretend for a moment, that the Jihad hate us because they believe - that if they don't stop us now, our soldiers, in THEIR country (notice that predicament?), are going to take over and destroy their way of life and harm them. Instead, we fight, we take prisoners and we torture them. Maybe the Jihad were wrong. Maybe they had no justified reason to hate us, and over time, they would learn that and we could all find peace. Or, just maybe, we have finally given them a REAL reason to hate us. Maybe we have just "justified" their fears. Just maybe... but are you willing to take that chance? Are you willing to make them so afraid and desperate that they will act irrationally? I'm not. I have a son. I do NOT want extremists to be pushed to the corners of fear that their only resolution is to come out swinging. Maybe they would still blow us up, someday. But, that's why we 'justify,' so much security in American borders, isn't it? Hmm...
 
Here's the problem - what if they ARE planning an attack and we COULD stop it? This is where shows like "24" have been carefully designed to convince the American populous that believe what comes through their idiot box to be assured of the fears the government wants to instill. We are shown that if we do not act predictively, we will suffer - our children will suffer. Really? Maybe so. Maybe if we don't torture every would be terrorist, extremist and person who's different from us, we are doomed! Of course, I'm not so sure that's the type of mentality that conforms to 'freedom.' Am I free if I live in fear? Am I free if I spend my time, my tax dollars and my life hunting ghosts? I thought "Homeland security," meant just that - homeland security. I thought that there were FBI in our air ports, police with excessive abuse authority, CIA and others who can freely monitor us because they were protecting us on the home front? In fact - weren't those folks there when 9-11 happened? Weren't those folks there when the Oklahoma bombing happened? Sure they were. Were they doing their jobs? YES!! Of course, the argument is that they didn't have the "freedom," they needed to do their jobs 'effectively.'
 
The freedom... to do their jobs... effectively?
 
You mean, the freedom to monitor ALL our communications. To watch us, look over us, control us, keep us locked down under the pretense of what appears to be... freedom. Oh sure - you radicals out there say things like, "Why don't you move to Iraq if you hate it here so bad - be thankful for what you have." But, YOU'RE the sheep. YOU'RE the one that voted for a President with a 3 trillion dollar budget - the majority of which goes to... MORE security. YOU'RE the one that has NEVER suffered, NEVER lost, NEVER been at the receiving end of the nightmare that is the so-called, "homeland" security. You can't see it. You can't know it. You can't even understand it - until it happens to you. Thes past two years I've met SO MANY people who are dumbfounded by the reality of what's taken place in my life. They can NOT believe that the legal system works the way it does. They can NOT believe the corruption. In fact - many of them have bore witness to it, through me, DIRECTLY - and yet, even with it in front of their OWN EYES - they can NOT understand HOW or WHY all of this is happening here in America!!
 
Move to Iraq? What a dumb response. I love America. I LOVE the principals upon which it was founded. My forefathers did NOT torture the English to see when and where they were attacking. My forefathers felt that it was time for a new, civilized society that protected itself the best it could, armed the common man even (not that I necessarily agree with that - and no - I don't own a gun myself), and believed in the ability of all peoples to seek freedom here. Were there extremists in their time? YES!! The Native Americans being raped of their land would raid forts and villages murdering and raping women and children! (No - that's not a blanket statement on ALL indians - only a commentary on the FEW who did it - just like the Jihad are not all against us - only the FEW who act upon it). There were soldiers and troops - people of THIS country who felt they had the right to do what they wanted in harm of others (ie. slavery), who raided and attacked innocents. This is NOT new. What IS new, is the 'civilized' America, resorting to uncivilized and monstrous actions in the name of FEAR. What's new are people so desensitized the brutal TORTURE of another human being, that they can somehow justify it.
 
Right or wrong, good or bad - I don't know. I'm not the final say on these matters. YOU are. YOU must think for yourself. But, if the torture of the Jihad, who hate us for infringing on their way of life (amongst other reasons), and feel they must get us before we get them, is justified under the premise that we must get them before they get us - what was so wrong about the torture of Jesus the Christ? Wasn't it the Jewish community that felt He was destroying their way of life? Weren't their actions of repeated ABUSE and torture predicated on the pretense that He must be stopped BEFORE He can derail their entire society? Weren't they trying to stop Him before He stopped them? What about Hitler? His generals (notice the distinction in WHOM at this point), tortured Jews because they felt the Jews were going to continue to derail and destroy their very society. Maybe, they were right. Maybe, if the Jewish community had continued unchecked, the Germany we know today would not be German, but Jewish, and the German lineage would be dead. So, a few extremists tortured the Jews to find out if they were planning an attack. Are you planning something? No. Are you going to raid our bases? No. Are you trying to undermine us? No. When is it okay? When must it stop? Are we NAZI Germany? Are we Crucifiers of the Lord? Are these fair comparisons, or are these too extreme for you? Do you justify torture under the pretense that you are caring for others? If so, why would you argue against the common person's right to bear arms, concealed and free. If it's their freedom and protection you're concerned about - in a proactive manner - why not permit everyone to keep guns? Then, they don't have to "wait" for the retroactive response by the police? In fact - you should support wire-tapping of everyone, cameras in everyone's homes, bathrooms, businesses, etc. That way - we can take the "extreme" act of torturing to the next level, and simply remove the "freedom," and privacy that was so "foolishly," Constitutionally invoked and simply protect everyone?
 
Or - are you acting upon a pretense told to you by the media and your government? Are you assuming because you've been lead to believe something? You see, I don't love America as it is now - I love America for what it SHOULD be. I LOVE this country for what it CAN be. But, a country is not a government. It is a people. And, it MUST be by the people that higher standards of living are demanded and supported. What do you believe America should be? Guerilla war tactics, torture and lies? Maybe if you believe that - YOU should move to Iraq - and live amongst those who believe that to be the foundation of their society - because it's NOT the foundation of THIS one!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The REAL problem of the gay marriage proposal

Posted by CyberMom on Monday, May 18, 2009 1:10:58 PM
I will refrain from expressing my opinions as to whether or not homosexuality is permissable or not (as it is not my right to judge any other person in this world), I will comment on the problem of the 'gay' marriage proposal, because - it directly involves a violation of our Constitutional rights in this country. Don't see how - let me show you:
 
You see, the institution of marriage is a sacred and secular one that demands the utmost respect. However, in more modern times (mostly, the last hundred years - although the issues I'm about to address have been around here and there in the past), it has been treated with a level of indignity that does not reflect the respect of the Divine Order which instituted this sacred union. Is that because of 'homosexuality?' Well, only in regards to this most recent proposal of allowing gay marriages. It started back in the beginning of time when married couples fought, disrespected and mistreated one another. It started in a time when men felt they had a right to 'use' women as concubines or servants. However, as society has progressed, one might imagine that those issues have lessened. And, they have. But, not so much as by the actions of the people, but more so by the involvement of Government. When Secular faith and governmental politics crossed, and divorces became an acceptable institution in ALL faiths - the sanctity of that Divine union of a man and woman was severely injured. We may argue that in some cases, a divorce may be necessary, I believe that the first and foremost doctrine on marriage, that offered by Jesus the Christ, clearly resolves that matter. When a man, or a woman, has failed in their duties of an equal union built upon the sanctity of love, friendship, dedication, devotion and a Divine inspiration to be united as one, it is fair to say that they are no longer deserving of that relationship. However - to be 'remarried,' is an issue of such fragilty that the point of chastity of widows and the caring of widows by the common public, as commanded by Jesus the Christ, was lost.
 
As humans, we are by nature, lazy. We look for an easy way out. In fact, I am first and foremost, amongst you all - the MOST guilty of this. While I strive to live a life that reflects our Heavenly Savior, I too must never forget that I am but a mortal, and prone to error. And, so, avoiding the initiation of actions such as 'remarriage,' would have been a great way to ensure that I (nor anyone else), could not take the 'easy' way out. Instead, we have divorce, remarriage, single parent-hood and a society that is wrought with strife. And, who permits these 'divorces,' or 'remarriages?'
 
It began with political intervention - yes - the government. No longer does it take a member of the clergy, classes, time, honor and respect to be married. Today, it takes $25 and signing some paperwork in front of a Judge. Congratulations - you have shortcut the ENTIRETY of divine unions and gone straight to the unevolved state of 'monkey-hood,' in which you are resolving your immediate need for gratification and circumventing that which is supposed to be the boundary line of a civilized society - patience and delayed gratification. I'm not saying that this is wrong - for those who haven't the money for a church. It's not wrong for those who haven't yet found a faith. It would be my hope and prayer, that one day, within their divine union, they would seek for a higher power (as the ONLY TRUE PRINCIPAL BEHIND MARRIAGE IS TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE EYES OF GOD). Of course, the government has dramatically mislead the people into accepting its role as a higher power. Now comes the point of gay marriages -
 
If this were REALLY about 'insurance' policies, don't you think the government, that is issuing out mandates permitting gay marriages, could also create mandates forcing insurance companies to modify their policies? They do it EVERY day. In fact, permitting gay marriages does NOT mean that a couple can walk into just 'any' church and be married. It takes away the secular basis of an individual claiming to have divine authority and replaces it with governmental - man's - temporal authority. Yes, the same men who get divorced, partake of domestic violence and other such acts, are now the governing authority over gay marriages. So, what TRUE sanctity is there? In fact, if a minister of a church were to establish his own church and accept doctrines of homosexuality, gay and lesbian individuals could most certainly be married. The government accepts a so-called 'minister,' dressed as Elvis, marrying two people for $25, in proxy, it can most certainly accept the doctrines of any established faith. Those of a homosexual persuasion could have sought to establish their own insurance company with policies allowing support for 'life-partners.' So why is this such an issue?
 
It's an issue - it's in the news - and it has the world's attention because once again, we are watching the government interject into the private lives of individuals and destroy the purpose and foundation of America. This country was founded to allow individuals to be unique and different without political intervention. The freedom of religion was founded to be unique without political intervention. If the States pass a law mandating that gay marriage is to be allowed, what freedoms for the secular faiths that oppose this is there? Should the LDS, the Seventh Day Adventists or any of the others have to change what they believe to be divine providence to permit gay marriage? When does the church's "freedom," no longer have value in the eyes of the law? When is the law no longer a standard of equality which the Constitution designed for all peoples of this nation, because it intrudes on the lives of others? The answer is clear: when it strives to change the laws for some, depriving others of their freedoms. That's the very foundation upon which law is designed. An individual is free to do what they want until it impedes another in some egregious manner. Murder, rape, theft, abuse - all impede on the rights of another. Now, the sacredness and privacy and privilege of a church to do as they will be their divine inspiration has been impeded upon.
 
Is there a fix? Yes, the State governments could have mandated that they will recognize, legally, anyone who is homosexual in marriage. That is not to say, they pass a law 'allowing it,' as freedom of religion should have allowed it from the beginning - regardless of any moral opinions on it being right or wrong. The State governments could have mandated that they will require insurance companies to act upon the policies of non-discrimination including secular, marital or otherwise, that they promote in their contracts, upholding the standards of fair business practices. But, we're faced with one more dilemma-
 
How do we stand for or against such an institution? If we support this institution, the we encourage the government to continue to intervene in our private and secular lives, taking away not only our freedom, but specifically robbing us of it as mentioned before. If we stand for it, we acknowledge that we have no rights. If we stand against it, we must petition the government. But, how do we do that, without also telling the Government that we want their intervention into our private and secular lives?
 
The only thing we can do is petition our churches, if we believe in it or against it, to take a stand either way. Either allow it, or don't. And, it will be up to each one of us to take accountability for our OWN actions and our OWN selves and not spend time judging others or worrying about what other people are doing. If our secular faith lets us down (either way), we will have to find a new, spiritual direction. But, if today, for example, we were to protest gay marriage and have the government intervene, what's to stop them from requring secular faiths to institute other, non divinely inspired rules? What's to stop the government from marching in on the doors of an organized faith and demand they comply or pay the penalty? At what point is it egregious toward us, the people, that our tax dollars are being spent for the government to circumvent 'good' business practices of insurance companies in non discriminatory issues and instead, impede upon the individual (because we're an easier target - even though WE'RE the taxpayers)? At what point is my voice now stifled from being able to say anything, for or against this matter, because government intervention was wrong in the first place, and to have them intervene again would be just as wrong (as we all know, contrary to the current, political agenda of this country - two wrongs actually DON'T make a right)?
 
Ask yourself - Do YOU want the same people who have a history of cheating their taxes, bouncing checks, getting multiple divorces, partaking in prostitution, facing criminal matters and so on to make YOUR secular decisions? Then you must confront your church and stand on your own principals - even if you are alone - much in the same way our Heavenly Savior did, and state what you believe and demand that the secular organization which answers to YOU - it's congregation - upholds those standards. But, before you do - make sure you're not judging, passing judgment or acting for yourself. Because, if you are - IF - you are acting upon your own heart and selfishness, then what makes you ANY different than those people who involved the government in the first place and demanded gay marriage be supported? I'm not scolding them for their gender-based preferences, but for being the few who felt it necessary to impede upon the rights of others without consideration for the hearts of the masses, but themselves. Because, truthfully - marriage is NOT a ring. Marriage is NOT a minister. Marriage is NOT a legal recognition. Marriage is a bond, between two people, that will stand the test and trials of their lives, based on love, friendship and equality. Marriage is an act of two hearts and God. That's it. The 'ceremonies,' are just that - ceremonies. Even if you're in a faith that believes the ceremonies necessary to be acknowledged by God - the truth is - God sees our hearts. He knows our most sincere and deepest desires. He is not fooled by rings and ceremonies. He knows if two people are so insincere that divorce is in their future.
 
And, ONLY HE KNOWS. Not us. Not men or women. We must act on our own agency, will, desires and freedom - but we must remember always - that what we do today will have SEVERE consequences, good or bad, on what comes tomorrow. And, I think THIS is a perfect example of that.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bend Parks and Rec calling for more cops.. oh boy...

Posted by CyberMom on Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:47:03 PM
Here we go again - more cops in Bend. If it wasn't bad enough the ratio of police is 1 to every 800 people, in our SMALL town (not counting sheriffs, state and federal officers...) - now they're in our parks. Wait... they were in our parks before (anyone else noticed the 'bike' cops?)! So - this IS about money. Not only will we be paying for the cops through our tax money - but the check that the Parks and Rec District write the cops will come from... wait... our TAX Money!! See how that works? And, let me offer the TRUTH for those of you who watched this report on television - it is NOT that the Parks and Rec director believes people will 'respect' the cops more than they will Bennett - it's that they will 'FEAR' the cops more than they do Bennett. Because, in truth, not one person can say that when they see a cop, they don't automatically have some level of fear or concern - even if that concern is to jutify being less concerned because they're not, doing anything wrong.... Either way - it's fear mongering - and this is AMERICA - NOT COMMUNIST CHINA!!

Here it comes - caching - more money out of our pockets for police. More money for the police and the courts through tickets for DOG owners. Sure - no one wants to see a dog bite someone - but that's not what this is about. How many 'dog attacks' from 'unleashed' dogs have we had in the parks (say, vs. homes or ANYWHERE else)? Can you name ONE? How about TWO? Maybe a few? Try looking it up and see that they don't exist. We're so busy handing off accountabilty and responsibility to the authorities - the same ones who shoot unarmed, innocent kids without remand, prevent sons from saying goodbye to their dying mothers in the hospital out of sheer pride and inhumane selfishness and most recently - as of recent headlines - are put on probation/let go for frauding the public, or hurting innocent people. We NEED to begin taking accountability and responsibility for OURSELVES - and that is the type of America that Bennett represents!

Maybe it's time we say: NO. No to the overpriced police department where the current budget is over $35 MILLION, third only to water and wastewater services as far as municipal costs go!! Maybe if the City were to invest even a lousy $3 million - of that $35 million - into the current, $13 million community development fund and build parks where leashes were offered for free, dog parks were made more convenient for their owners or do something FOR the citizens of Bend who are FOOTING THIS BILL, then we wouldn't need so many cops (starting to sound like AIG - or maybe - Marxist Communism?)! Have you been to the courthouse lately? Near 100 NEW names EVERY DAY! I don't know about your math, but in a town with 76,000 people - that is more than HALF of the people of Bend and a THIRD of the entire County's population in a year's time?? WHAT is going on?? We have park directors who want to instill fear, raise our expenses during difficult, economic times - and for what? To patrol the parks for potential, future risks? Because, if a dog hasn't attacked or hurt someone - then the leash law is nothing more than a 'predictive' measurement in which we're going to assume EVERY dog and their owner is GUILTY, and force them to prove their innocence later on. That is NOT AMERICAN. INNOCENT first - then - guilty. And, you ask, what if it was me who got hurt or a family member by the dog? Well, if you're asking that question - then YOU do not have the same faith and trust in God that I do, that believes in our ability to love and forgive, and at that point, relies on the law to come in and fix the situation so no one else, gets hurt. And - I'd die in a heartbeat, without a second thought, for my son, if the choice had to be made.

I say NO! If Bennet makes $60k of that $100k budgeted - and there's even an additional $25k in expenses - that's $15k left over for her to carry around dog leashes - give people their GOD GIVEN right to make a choice and not FORCE things upon them, ask people to be respectful, and then, if need be - CALL IN the cops when people are in violation. Because... what do you think they do now? Why do you think she carries around the walkie talkie? Maybe if Bend PD didn't require 15 officers on the scene to get a cat out of a tree - they'd be able to respond to her calls!! And, if we DON'T stop this - you know as well as I do - that the ENTIRE $100k check will go to the Bend PD, whether they're there - or not! Start making a difference people - If you love this town even HALF as much as I do - you'll demand the Parks and Rec PRESERVES our happiness and freedom and STOP them from turning the parks into a place of fear mongering!!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Okay, we're awake - now what?

Posted by CyberMom on Thursday, April 16, 2009 1:25:14 PM
Whilst listening to the radio talk show hosts I hear the consistent claims (of late), that the American people are 'waking up' to the reality of our 'situation.' People want to learn the 'truth' about our history so they can find out what's really going on. Okay, fine. I'll digress on the obvious frustrations that creates (aka this website being about the consequences of what happens when the governments lie to the people - and the people act like mindless sheep), and simply "accept" this concept.
 
My question is: now what? Great, you finally woke up from this self-induced coma and found yourself in the middle of a collapsing hospital; now what do you do? You'd love to flee, but the same earthquake that's rocking the hospital is rocking the world around you and there's nowhere really safe. You could stand by and take it, but you were already doing that, so that just seems silly. Fight? Sure. Stand up for yourself and try to survive the collapse? Okay, I'll bite... how?
 
I've heard so many people saying that we should 'call' Congress and chew them out, literally. We should tell them that we're tired of their taking advantage of us. Chew them out for what? The money they're sucking out of the economy? The collapse in jobs? Why don't I call AIG and tell them to shove off? Why don't I call the City and tell them to stop wasting my money? Don't misunderstand - I'm ALL for ONE person doing something. Aka - the "Shot heard round the world." It starts somewhere. But, what is complaining to Congress going to do? They're in office. They're secure. Are they going to reduce taxes? Sure they will! They'll cut taxes and wasteful spending - i.e. schools and libraries and transportation....
 
But, wait - that's NOT what I meant! I meant to cut out THEIR outrageous spending and wealth earning and be a government FOR the people. But, what's happened already in the 'wake' of our 'waking up?' Congress has done exactly what I just said - they've cut what they believe to be 'unnecessary' services, starting with SCHOOLS and other important functions that directly SUPPORT the people while continuing to flood money into services that MANAGE the people!! This... is getting ridiculous.
 
I've also heard the claim that we should tell our members of Congress to cut out their hypocrisy. But, just exactly HOW am I supposed to do that? Hypocrisy is defined as: Acting in a manner that is opposed to one's actual beliefs or feelings; contradictory. So, what? Hey you guys - stop being so contradictory. You promised us freedom and liberty and a fair shot but you're self serving, and that's not right!
 
Yeah - that's gonna work. C'mon. We NEED change. Change, is not coming. Example: Pacific Power and Electric, in the Pacific Northwest, has petitioned the PUC to permit them to raise their rates on the people by 2010. Yep - when everything's still in chaos, jobs are still on the line, PacPower wants to increase rates. Why? More jobs? More people? Nope. They want to do it because they want to make more money - bottom line. Do they need it? Oh, heavens no. They're VERY well funded (you can read my post on how/why Oregon is getting stupider by the minute). Will the politicians stand up to them? Why should they? An increase in our rates means an increase in the tax income base and more money for Uncle Sam. Oregon has a law suspending the license of minors who drink. No - it's not okay that they drink. But, did they drink and drive? NO. That's really making the punishment fit the crime! Way to trust the government to help teach morality to our children!! April is Child abuse prevention month where LOTS of children in Oregon suffer from this fate every year. The Kid's diagnostic and intervention center (who conveniently hides their full name as: The Kid's Center... see that? see how WELL that does NOT state what they REALLY do?), has put up their tree of hope with the names of kids who are suffering and need support.
 
Sounds b-e-a-utiful, doesn't it? Well, if you've read ANY of my stories in this blog about the truth of DHS, how much abuse they've caused to children by doing what it is they do and how their services are still unable to REALLY help with child abuse prevention because they're TOO busy destroying families to fill their pockets, you might understand how this is hypocriticism in its purest form! (Yes - I know - hypocriticism is not a 'word,' but words are defined by what we choose to define them by and I think you might be intelligent enough to get my point and already know that I don't have an opportunity to edit my own posts for grammar, so please, deal with it).
 
The point is - telling our Congressmen and Congresswomen: Hey you, stop listening to the rich people, doing whatever it is YOU want to do and start representing us, is all well and good. But, the truth is, we've saying that for years. And then, we do something terrible - WE, the PEOPLE, perform an act of hypocrisy that deteriorates our very foundation of support. We VOTE these people into office. It's no question that Barrack Obama and John McCain had issues - both of them. It's no question that both of them have been in places that we, the people, just can't support. But, we give our Congressional leaders the power to choose FOR us, limit our choices (depriving us of our freedoms), and then vote in the lesser of two evils. Yes - re-read that: two evils. We don't hold our politicians, our elected officials, OR our appointed governmental officials (post office, police, IRS, DHS, etc.) to any standard of accountability. So, go ahead, tell you Congress members to cut more spending, and, they will; just, not where you wanted it cut. Go ahead and tell them to quit being hypocriticizers (a special variant of the word for all you harold & kumar fans...), and then realize YOU voted them into office??!! You trusted them with YOUR money! YOU gave them the power to CONTROL you! YOU agreed to let them pass laws without requiring accountability for their actions.
 
How many of you saw MSNBC's broadcast of: The Witch hunt? http://www.tlavideo.com/product/1-0-283234_witch-hunt.html?sn=1 No, this is NOT a historical video. This is an account of innocent people, falsely accused in the 80's, and what's happened to their lives, their children and the people around them. It's an itsy bitsy, teeny weenie slice of the GIGANTIC pie regarding corruption by the police, the courts, the prosecutors and the system in general. It's a "REAL" life look into what's going on, RIGHT NOW, that your media is lying to you about. How many of you know that there were witnesses in the Martha Stewart case that falsified/withheld information? Hmmm? Bet you DIDN'T hear about that. That's NOT what the media portrays, because that's NOT what the government tells them they're allowed to portray. Oh yes, conspiracy theories again, right? Wrong - because if you don't know that there was proof of her innocence - then you don't know everything. No - I'm not exonerating her - I'm picking a case. You can look at Operation Ore in Britain and Operation Candyman in the U.S. to see just how many innocents are STILL being falsely prosecuted, in a 'witch hunt', because our Congressional leaders are NOT interested in OUR best interests. They act irrationally, do what's popular and hide the majority of their actions so that we won't know about it - or understand the truth about what was going on - no matter HOW much history we want to learn - until it's too late and we're a victim of the system.
 
So, yes - we're awake. Fine. We're ready to do "something." But, what? What do we do? I've argued before on this topic and I'll say it again - I fear this country is in line for a violent revolution of such proportions that our next 20 generations will feel its effects. Multitudes have already gathered in preparation for it. But, folks, it doesn't have to be that way. When you learn your history, and you learn that the government has been lying to you then, know that they're lying to you now! It hasn't stopped! No fairy tale has come true! But, we have other solutions - such as individual States segregating themselves from the Union to begin to return to our roots - as long as they're willing to do it the right way! Not with increased force upon the people, but by going back to the Constitution, in its base form, and reworking changes from there. Eradicating the laws, the taxes and the garbage that's been spewed for the last 240+ years and beginning anew, putting everything out to the people. Sure - some of it will require more time, and we'll all have to be patient. But, I can promise you this: if you believe in God, and you have Faith, in ANY proportion - you don't have to be religious or follow some specific ordinance of any Church - but you rely upon God's FIRST doctrine, His FIRST scriptures - the world around you - you will see the answer. His FIRST book, is this Earth, and all of its creatures upon it. His first promise is there, and I promise you, if you call your Congress people and offer them an opportunity to resign rather than be impeached, if you gather peaceably, but with a REAL goal, not long-winded debates, you'll see an answer.
 
Good luck. "To be awake is to be alive and I have never met a man who's fully awake." Thoreau
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Is Oregon getting..stupider?

Posted by CyberMom on Thursday, April 09, 2009 6:30:37 PM
   Or is it, is Oregon getting stupiderer? I don't know as it's hard to tell here in the Pac Northwest where the I.Q.'s of our elected officials are being sold off to fill their pockets. The only catch is, they weren't doing so great in the beginning!!
 
In 2005, the citizens of Oregon piped up against Governor Kulongoski's heavy taxation, budget drilling, fool-hardy prison:
 
 
The State is absolutely convinced that by 2014, we'll have imprisoned (long-term) at least 17,000 Oregonians. Unfortunately, at the current rate, that number is much, much higher. In fact, with all the jails added in and short-term prisoners, that number escalates dramatically! For a state with only 3 million people, our prison population, that's a LOT. Don't be fooled - the real numbers are higher.
Oregon currently has 30 people awaiting the death penalty...
Oregon has a 30% recidivism rate
Oregon has 14 prisons (only 1 being max security)
 
Now for the ignorance:
Yes - the governor is making it appear as if everything's awesome. Dice the school budget - throw in a prison! Hey, afterr all, these guys talk about the budget like they're all about to get rich quick. and the rest of us are the peons footing the bill!
 
The governor promotes less gvt intrusion, then creates laws to control lives like measure 11....
He promotes supporting an economy turn-around, then cuts off stimulus monies to unemployment benefits to support profiteering projects like a new prison....
He attacks racial disparity in Foster Care, and then sends out MORE support and new appointments at DHS to take MORE kids away from their families...
 
This man is not only corrupt, he's not too bright. But, are Oregon prisons overcrowded? Yes, in fact, they are. But, rather than spend stimulus monies to 'deal' with these problems, to provide correctional/rehab opportunities, to improve education and what-not, he reduces school year terms, throws people in little cells never to see them again and then begs the feds for more stimulus money! He's GM, Ford and the others all rolled into One!
 
 
But wait, there's MORE -
 
Pacific Power, the main provider for Oregon, has approached the government with a request to increase business and residential costs.
They prepared a FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY FOUR page "brief," to justify their logic. And, the reason is?
 
They need to fund more infrastructure to handle the growth and bigger income they're planning on from a population boone. HAHAHAHA - yup - they want to increase the costs for THEIR POCKETS!!! Talk about AIG....
These guys are the biggest utility scam artists on the west coast. Just google their name in relationship to lawsuits.
http://www.pacificpower.net/File/File78116.pdf; http://www.aclu-or.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Lit_main_ct; and SO many others. These are the same people that are constantly being punished by the government for taxation and utility fraud violations!!! For pete's sakes - why doesn't the government interject themselves into the power company's lives and just END THIS?

Every complaint - EVERY ONE - that has come before the Oregon PUC has defaulted in their favor. They have been forcing power spikes, averaging bills, and illegally manipulating the system. Without the PUC EVER acting as a checks and balance for PP&L - we're in trouble.

As for needing the money for renewable energy projects? Check again. We ALREADY pay a tax in our current bill for this. Then, when we go to buy it, we have to pay extra above and beyond the current rate to adjust for the green tags PP&L has to buy. The do NOT buy green tags, in OR, as required and then transfer the savings to the customer at equal rates. They charge us the FULL production rate of coal AND the RETC rates. And, the added taxes - how do those support renewable energy projects when, almost EVERY one in the Pacific Northwest has had to be privately funded.

The Energy Trust of Oregon is a joke and designed solely to mess up the renewable energy industry. But, nobody watches over them, either. Welcome to the Pacific Northwest. Great if you're rich -and can afford to go broke slowly. With a bill "lower" than the rest of the nation? HAHAHAHA - try again. States without winter times do not pay what we do. PP&L's rates, by themselves, are as high or higher than ANYwhere else in the nation - we just have less taxes in Oregon.

Great - more governments - more lying. Just what we need. The Governor's office is raping the people for their OWN gain, the utility companies are cheating the government - at OUR cost and then trying to rape us in return, and the list goes on and on and on!
 
Yup, I'm pretty sure that Oregon's gettin' ta' be the stupidestest of every state out there!!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1234Next »