tagged w/ Liberty
-
Watch this Video with an Eagles eye, listen intently-see what's ahead if we don't wake upWatch this Video with an Eagles eye, listen intently-see what's ahead if we... more
-
-
Out of the depths of photographer Hayley Murphy’s psyche spills out somecolorful goo, in the shape of a Martianpainting a Statue of Liberty with choco-late, and an Islamic rebel strapped witha machine gun, devouring a table of sweets. Murphy captures images that pop into her head, that stew in her sub-conscious as she sleeps and dreams, and glues these mental clues together, bring-ing life to what her unconscious brainis trying to tell her, which results ininsanely-colorful photographic riddlesthat never stop producing questions,or giving answers. With the rawness of Hans Bellmer, the famboyance of DavidLa Chapelle and the confusion-inducinggenius of David Lynch, she wrestles hermind-blips in front of the lens to seewhat the puzzle looks like once all the pieces are in place. Here’s a look intohow her mind rolls.... http://www.makeahistory.com/index.php/section-table/42975-hayley-murphy-statue-of-liberty-with-chocolateOut of the depths of photographer Hayley Murphy’s psyche spills out somecolorful... more
-
-
worrg
-
added this
-
11 months ago
- |
-
's-Election-set-to-go-off-with-a-WhimperTwo years ago, it threatened to trigger a wave of dissent that would reverberate around the Middle East and beyond.
Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, took to the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities to protest the reelection of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, a poll that opponents claimed was rigged.
Yet on June 12, with much of the region in a state of revolutionary ferment, the second anniversary of Iran's bitterly disputed presidential election is likely to pass off as little more than a footnote.'s-Election-set-to-go-off-with-a-WhimperTwo years ago, it threatened to trigger a... more
-
-
Talk of efforts to create a North American Union has been derided by the elite — politicians, talking heads and the mainstream media — as conspiracy-theory nuttery. But a leaked United States diplomatic cable proves the leaders of the U.S., Canada and Mexico have been working to create a borderless North America, similar to the European Union, since at least 2005.
The cable, leaked by WikiLeaks and reported on by the Canadian National Post, said: “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers. The economic payoff of the prospective North American initiative … is available, but its size and timing are unpredictable, so it should not be oversold.”
In the cable, U.S. diplomats focused on a number of key areas to move forward with continental integration, including a possible common currency, labor markets, international trade and the borders of the three countries, according to the article.
Diplomats were negotiating how to handle professional-licensing laws and work-permit systems between the three countries, which would make it easier for people to move from one country to the other.
The Administration of President Barack Obama is currently in discussions with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper about creating the first step of the process by laying the groundwork for a stronger perimeter-security arrangement, intelligence sharing and trade deals, the paper reported.
Globalists pushing for a one-world government are taking an incremental approach to achieve their goal by combining countries into larger entities. They believe this will make it easier to combine larger regions into a single whole later on.
Questions about the possibility of a union of the countries have been met with disdain and denials by Administrations past and present. But these cables prove they were lying while trying to cover up the fact that they were negotiating away America in secret.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/06/02/leaked-u-s-cable-lays-out-north-american-%E2%80%98integration%E2%80%99-strategy/Talk of efforts to create a North American Union has been derided by the elite —... more
-
-
This programme advises visitors and residents in the UK on how to behave appropriately in Britain. The message is, we are incapable of either tolerating people’s irksome behaviours or of speaking to people ourselves. Warning: this programme contains rude noises, toilet humour and bad images.This programme advises visitors and residents in the UK on how to behave appropriately... more
-
-
Persian Female Warriors. iran before the arab invasion Persian women had hight ranks in Persian society and were treated as goddesses before the Arab invasion and imposition of the dark, backward, and pernicious Arab ideology of Islam upon Persia which destroyed our liberty, form of government, system of Federalism, Equal Rights, Freedom of speech, Freedom of religion and Democracy and replaced those ideals and systems with a backward, central brutal government, discrimination and slaveryPersian Female Warriors. iran before the arab invasion Persian women had hight ranks... more
-
-
by David Shirk on May 25, 2011 in Philosophy
I was surprised to see some of the comments that I did on my last article – Thoughts of a Middling American Part 1 (http://current.com/1m4umkc ). I wonder if many of the readers even know where the term Middling came from. Empire of Liberty has a good few chapters on it – good book. That having been said, here is part two, and the answer to some of the comments.
“seems to me that you have made a whole lot of assumptions in your post.”
You do not seem to have read the entire article as I will now address.
“You said that any law that seeks to limit human behavior will fail. Well, I think the law that limits murder is a pretty good law, and yes it fails”
Murder is hardly normal human behavior – you then say “Isn’t the law there so people who do commit murder can be prosecuted for same?” And yet one need not go very far to see the very same law throwing people into prison or giving them life in prison (having been convicted of murder) – when the evidence was largely lacking – in addition, many have even had their innocence proven after the sentence has already been carried out. However I still see your point and consider it no less valid despite my opposing view on the matter – however how many laws do we have on the books in regards to murder as oppose to tax laws etc? Or if you believe that taxes are fully justified, then how about laws regarding trade, business transactions, ethics, civil rights etc? such laws have in the past benefitted some people, yet on the same token, cost far more to have to cut back as a result. Bastiat explained it far better than I ever could, and if you believe yourself to be smarter then he is in the grand scheme of things, then I would like to see you refute his points. Start with his short work – The Law.
“Funny, I find that we are being ruled more by the minority (large corporations) than by the majority (the people).” – We are ruled by the minority true – but does not the ‘majority’ as society calls it, elect the minority into office to ‘lead’ them? If so, then I stand by my corollary – “Even within the majority lies a major upset in belief systems. So how can a people honestly believe that whatever the majority on the whole agrees on will be beneficial to all? It cannot, and the notion people have that what works for them will work for me is offensive at best.”
“I guess you think that if a person has an “ivy league” education that they are some how not fit to hold office. Perhaps you would rather they not be educated at all.” – Trite. However consider this – if our leaders are so intelligent, then how is that after 230 years, we have become that which we fought against in the initial revolution? The truth is that there are libraries, seminars, bookstores, and a wealth of information online as well as discussion boards. Or even places to discuss ideas online. Besides, whether one has a degree or not is irrelevant – I could give you several essays and seminars written by a guy who holds a PhD and a masters degree, but because he disagree with your Phd and masters guy, it does not matter. This is why I listen to both, read the source material, watch for reactions, and judge for myself.
I have seen more attacks on the post then I have anything rebutting them – most are directed at the source not the content. Sad really.
Funny how the guy who did 10 years of law enforcement (and thus knows of which he speaks) was voted down simply for agreeing with me – most likely by those who never served themselves. Once again – kinda sad…I served 10 years in the army and am proficient in small team tactics. I would bet my bottom dollar that if I started posting these tactics on this forum, that they too would be voted down and have one sided comments thrown at them by those who never had any training or military studies at all. It seems that is what makes for intelligent talk on this forum.
More people argue the number of views then the content. I would laugh, but it’s really not funny. The truth is that I find it sick that people would rather argue about software bugs and rankings then actually debate on a comment based forum on the content of the article…oh well.
“since we have not spoken with these individuals personally, or seen any of their test scores, or IQ scores (altho IQ tests are no longer as popular as they once were) aren’t we actually engaging in the author’s style of ‘assumption’?” No you are not. If you catch someone in the act of murdering someone else, would you believe them if they were to finish killing, and then tell you that they didn’t do it? I judge off of actions taken – not by what the guys say. The more open your eyes are, and the more facts you gather to add context and depth, the more you reason and the less you assume.
“ I rather think that as finite humans we will engage in ‘assuming’ because on some level we must assume before we can prove or disprove a hypothesis (or assumption).”” We all make assumptions sometimes. I am certainly no exception. However I would never petition for a law based off of an ignorant assumption either. In addition – I know what I know, and what works for me – and would never try to impose my way of doing things onto you. I understand that you also know what you know, and like me – are sometimes forced into a position where you must assume. However there is nothing more dangerous than setting a policy or long term action based on assumption.
“I had a college instructor who always gave essay tests, but he stated at the outset of his class that you didn’t need to parrot back what he said was the correct answer, you merely needed to argue ‘your’ answer successfully — that is how we learn.” – Sounds like you had a good professor.
Okay – that’s enough of that; time for something completely different.
In martial arts, you try to keep yourself on guard and not present your opponent with an opening. If you overextend yourself or get off balance, you create an expanded target area that your opponent will take advantage of. National defense is no different – the more you expand your area of occupation, the more you open yourself up to attack.
If you see an injustice being visited upon someone else, and want to do something about it – then feel free. Just be aware that you don’t know the offender, or their capabilities. Also be aware of your surrounding and other potential threats to you should you choose to interfere, lest you to become a victim. The same goes for our foreign policy on ‘getting the bad guy’. Unfortunately we never bothered to learn the nature of what we attack before doing so hence the many ‘foreign interventions’ we have made – some over 60 years old – that we are still tied up in today.
It is noble to help someone else when you can. It is stupid if you try to help them and impoverish yourself in the process, for then someone will have to help you as well – the cycle never ends.
Someone who works for something themselves is far less likely to take it for granted, and far more likely to use the proceeds in a meaningful manner.
Do not attribute to malice what is done in ignorance. Wars start this way.
I have read entirely too many books not of the main stream. This is frustrating because few people read the books I read. Oprah sells more books than Allistair Horne, Wood, or Rothbard. People love commentary off of current events – people hate studying the history behind them.
We live in a snapshot society where the only reality that seems to matter is what is currently being felt or experienced. I cannot think of to many things more damaging to a people then the adoption of this mindset. When age old wisdom is replaced with common knowledge, the people doom the....
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5233/thoughts-of-a-middling-american-part-2/by David Shirk on May 25, 2011 in Philosophy
I was surprised to see some of the... more
-
-
Can you come up with a better definition of America today!
No term generates more confusion or misunderstanding than fascism. It has been applied to people like McCarthy, Hoover, government policies and governments themselves. Exactly what is fascism? It is a totalitarian system of government that bases its economy on capitalism. While none of those examples are completely fascist, if they involved the lost of rights leading to a more authoritarian state or the enhancement of the elitists in a capitalistic society then we shall consider the label appropriate. After all fascism comes in various degrees or flavors just as democracy does. Further it took Hitler over a decade before he attained full power. Fascism and capitalism are inseparable. Notice how the corporate power structure is authoritarian and is geared to reward the elite owners but not the workers.
Leon Trotsky in a brilliant pamphlet first described Fascism. This description of fascism in and of itself is not noteworthy and has been expanded by several others, but the analysis of the evolution of a capitalistic society into a fascist society was brilliantly prophetic. We have already alluded to the fact that Hitler attained his power gradually and no rebellion or revolution was required, this is what makes fascism so insidious and dangerous. It is just a natural degenerative process of a capitalistic society. Likewise, Mussolini also attained power not through rebellion or revolution but through what could be termed a loud march or strike, a riot would simply be an overstatement of the facts. This paper will examine the creeping fascism present in the US and where it may lead if it's unchecked. We shall define creeping fascism as the lost of individual rights or the enhancement of the rights of the elite and corporations containing one or more elements of fascist behavior as defined by past philosophers of fascism or as defined by past behavior of fascist regimes. But first we must look at the evolution of governments and define exactly what fascism involves.
When I was a teen growing up I can recall my father stating that no government had ever lasted more than 200 years. At the time I scoffed at the idea, but with age comes wisdom for most people. So what is the wisdom in that simple statement? Obvious the 200 years figure is incorrect, the US government is now over 200 years old, but that for the most part is trivial. And we surely could find other examples in ancient history for instance the Chinese dynasties, the Roman Empire, ancient Egypt under the pharaohs. No the wisdom in the statement lies in the degeneration of all governments over time until they fail, one might be inclined to say its entropy's effect of tending to disorder. But that doesn't explain why some governments last for 200 years some fail after 60 years, the USSR and still others fail after thirteen years, Nazi Germany. Thus, there is even a more prominent and fundamental reason for the demise of governments through out time. Governments' failure to provide for the masses while maintaining an elitist class is a common theme in the failure of governments old and new a like. A casual glance at past governments that have failed reveals there is a relationship between the amount of liberty that a society enjoys and the stability or longevity of that government. Severely repress people have little to lose in a revolt. Even in a democracy the freedom of the masses are eroded over time as the rich elitists slowly chip away at personal freedoms and scheme to pass laws beneficial and protective of themselves. Perhaps, Thomas Jefferson said it best in the familiar quote: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is natural manure."
For the rest of the article go to the link provided:Can you come up with a better definition of America today!
No term generates more... more
-
-
by David Shirk
Assumptions are made about an event or action when there is a lack of information. Assumptions are easy to make, yet are usually very inaccurate. Reason on the other hand relies on information, and therefore is far more accurate than assumption. A people who assume too much and reason to little will never fail to impoverish themselves.
Gathering, weighing, and placing information into context is a relatively long process, and therefore not very popular. Thus assumption becomes conventional wisdom over common sense.
It is wrong to ask someone else to do something to further your ideals that you yourself would not do because you cannot be bothered with it. It is even more wrong to request your chosen leader to accomplish this for you at the expense of others.
With the right spin, stupidity can be made out to appear as nobility, tyranny as freedom, and poverty as wealth.
Fact is the event that actually happens. Perception is how people perceive such events with the knowledge they possess. Therefore if a people on the whole know little about an event, then they will be unable to place it in context. When this happens, a people become easily fooled into buying even the most nonsensical of laws.
Control the perception of the people by controlling the information flow, and you control the people.
A mob does not have to be violent to be dangerous. A mob that can vote has proven that time and time again.
If you want to upset a society, allow the village idiot a voice on its council. The village idiot can put things in simple terms that most people can understand with little or no research and therefore gains popularity. Once popular, the idiocy spreads until the society crumbles.
There are at least three definitions for every word – the dictionary definition, the political definition, and the popular one. Because society uses a mix of all of these, there is no end to the nonsense it will pursue.
Why do most modern day conservative Christians think that National debt is okay, when the bible speaks often on the dangers of being in debt? It is easy to claim a religion when it fits your purpose. It only becomes hard when you actually choose to live up to your beliefs as written.
The idea that everyone in the nation agrees on anything is more mythical than a belief in flying pigs. Therefore all a democracy can ever be is the rule of the majority over the minority. Even within the majority lies a major upset in belief systems. So how can a people honestly believe that whatever the majority on the whole agrees on will be beneficial to all? It cannot, and the notion people have that what works for them will work for me is offensive at best.
By changing the legal definition of a word, the law turns a civil right into a privilege. Under such a governing body, there is no freedom.
The fate of all governments is the same as a ship that is put to sea to often and worked beyond its limits – it will eventually sink itself. First the ship is built – or a government is established. Then it gets put to sea – the government starts governing. As the ship is passed from owner to owner it grows more and more overloaded and suffers from a lack of maintenance – as the government goes through leaders, it makes more and more laws and attempts to function beyond its limits. The ship hits a patch of rough waters, and sinks – the government becomes top heavy, and collapses. It is only a matter of time.
The more you try to control a people by force, the more rebellious they will become. This is why all governing bodies that hope to stay in power for a longer time use bad press, and outright lies as oppose to a gun. The gun only comes into play should their lies cease to work.
Any law that seeks to limit human behavior will fail no matter how well thought out. First it will be created, then it will be found to be insufficient to accomplish its lofty promise, and then it is modified. Rinse, lather, and repeat. Soon the law begins operating far outside of its intended purpose as it tries to please everyone. Then it sinks the people into debt and ignorance. By that time that happens, it has become accustomed to, and is no longer even a second thought to the majority until they come face to face with the consequences.
So accustomed will a people become to a bad law, that they will follow it – even after it has robbed them of their peace, freedoms, and prosperity.
I am not a negative person, I just pay attention.
Just because I am not a follower of the majority does not mean that I ‘just don’t get it’; it just means that I bothered to look into it myself and made my own judgment on the issue. If you would turn off the news, put the paper down, and actually examine the sources themselves and study them, you would see what I was talking about.
Following along with the ideals of your Ivy League educated ‘leader’ does not make you enlightened. It just means that you will follow them no matter how ridiculous their idea might be.
If you do not fully understand the details on an issue, then voting is the most irresponsible thing you can do. Just because an actor or entertainer tells you to do so, does not mean that you should.
To all those who join the Armed Forces thinking that you are serving your country, be aware that you are not serving your country, but its government. Also be aware that to enlist, you have to swear an oath to a piece of paper that the same government tramples on – every – single – day. If you want to protect those you love – stay at home where you will actually be able to do so.
To all those who seek to join Law Enforcement – you are not protecting or serving your community – you are protecting and serving a legal body that uses your efforts to further their own agendas. If
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5229/thoughts-of-a-middling-american-part-1/by David Shirk
Assumptions are made about an event or action when there is a lack... more
-
-
The governments got a PLAN. This PLAN’s origins were not in the halls of congress, but in the Department of Homeland Security’s baby FEMA, and the FCC. Before I begin, just keep in mind that neither of those bodies has to go to congress before taking action – they just do as they think as best, without the say so of any kind of vote at all.
PLAN – Personal Localized Alerting Network. This is an act that will allow the FCC and FEMA to send alerts to your phone in case of an impending emergency in your area. Cell phone providers such as AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon will be using it even ahead of the proposed schedule. The media has been playing this off as something that only the President will have control over, making it appear that we the people actually have a say. This is simply not true according to the FCC and FEMA – http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/personal-localized-alerting-network-plan and http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=54882 .
To those who know nothing about IT, this ma........
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5189/governments-new-tracking-system-plan/The governments got a PLAN. This PLAN’s origins were not in the halls of... more
-
-
It is often said that a convert to a cause is more fervent than those born to it. That is probably true about me and my "conversion" as an immigrant to this great country.
In that spirit of passionate desire for my adoptive land to become everything it was meant to be, may I humbly suggest, America, that Ron Paul is Your Man.
Just a few years ago, I was excited to follow Obama's success in the hope that he would undo the worst of the un-American shenanigans of the Bush administration, including the abrogation of rights of American citizens, the killing of citizens of lands that don't threaten us and the wholesale transfer of wealth from those that create it and play by the rules to those that do neither of those two things.
Perhaps I was a little caught up in the excitement, but my intentions were good.
As it has turned out, in most things that matter, Obama is not even Bush-lite: he's more like Bush-plus. I'm not questioning his moral intent, but simply looking around me at new wars, continuation of laws that remove Americans' basic rights, mass transfer of wealth from the working man to the large subsidized groups, including financial corporations and unions, that fund the old political game.
The old, tired, self-defeating left-right paradigm of American politics is about two teams that want to shape the world in one way or another, but both sharing the desire to impose their view on others, and both, therefore, with an interest in maintaining those fundamental aspects of the modern political settlement that allow politicians and their favored institutions to operate outside the most basic confines of the Constitution that was supposed to make the USA a Republic that protects life, liberty and property of all individuals.
Indeed, the two-party system, and all the unstated assumptions shared by both sides, does more to undermine practically the principles gifted by the nation's Founding Fathers than any other single political structure in the USA (except perhaps the Federal Reserve, which acts secretly and without political accountability).
Ron Paul transcends the left-right pseudo-divide.
He is almost unique in that he doesn't want to make a country of the left or a country of the right. Unlike every other politician, he doesn't need me to agree with him on anything -- except that I should be free to decide on what to agree or disagree with him about.
Ron Paul's world is quite different from that offered by almost any other American politician. In his world, neither the president nor the Congress gets to impose their preferences on 300 million citizens through the monopoly of force that is government, because Paul knows that the government has no such authority. Paul's world is a world based fundamentally on the principle of non-aggression, which is simply, "I may disagree with you but I do not get to use force, including the force of law, to impose my will on you as long as you harm no one." This principle is a philosophical one. It precedes politics -- and that is why it allows Paul to transcend the bankrupt left-right paradigm.
It is this true freedom that, paradoxically (given how most of us disagree about most things) promotes true unity, as division arises only when some people feel imposed upon by others. The promise of a more united nation under Obama (remember?) came to nothing, because Obama's politics, like Bush's, are as much about promoting a particular kind of world, which inevitably benefits some at the expense of others.
Ron Paul is one man who doesn't want to do that, because America was not created for that purpose.
Moreover, if one were to score American politicians on a) integrity, b) philosophical understanding of humanity and governance, and c) understanding of economics by looking at their speeches, votes, books and predictions, Paul would be among America's Very Best.
The huge movement behind Paul is demographically diverse, and has attracted people who used to think that they were on the left, as well as people who used to think they were on the right -- before they found out that what really matters, and what America was designed to preserve, is bigger than both left and right.
But here is the most unlikely, telling, astonishing, and ignored fact about Ron Paul: Paul's campaign logo (one of a few created spontaneously by his supporters for his 2008 run) has the word LOVE in it.
It actually has the word LOVE, picked out in big red letters from the word "Revolution." "Love Revolution," no less.
Politics based on Love?! Can you imagine any Western politician putting that in a speech and not having his or her audience shift in their seats uncomfortably at the strangeness of what they were hearing?
And yet, there it is, "LOVE," right in the middle of his logo in big red letters.
Love is expansive, accepting, free. It is also kind. (When did you last hear that word in politics?) Love says to its object, "As you wish," and a Paul presidency would say to its citizens just that: "It's not government's job to decide for you. Your life should be as you wish."
Now, that is true "free love," 2012 style.
As I ache to see America become the nation that was always meant to be, since 2012 will be the last American presidential election that I will not be permitted to vote in, I can only hope that my adoptive countrymen will take their astonishing opportunity to choose not just a political revolutionary, but also a philosophical one.
In electing Paul, Americans have the chance to say to each other, live and let love -- a politics of non-aggression in its profoundest sense.It is often said that a convert to a cause is more fervent than those born to it. That... more
-
-
This is a teaser from an article I wrote on Examiner.com:
From Public School, to church, to the movies and the major media and elections themselves, the American public is induced to believe that the Judges of America are men of integrity beyond reproach.
So with all of those credentials and long years of propaganda and censorship one faces a mighty steep mountain of indoctrination, propaganda and goodwill in exposing the true nature of Minnesota and the Country's Judiciary.
With the Judiciary's reputation reputation for integrity and honesty firmly embedded in the minds of WE THE PEOPLE, what standing do I have to challenge their reputations. In my estimate, what ever I might say would be easily dismissed, for what is my word to the word of these prestigious Judges.
To overcome this handicap, I will use the American Legal Systems own words to expose the true nature of their character.
Let us begin with the words of former FBI director J Edgar Hoover:
"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.''
Whatever could the former director of the FBI, with all of the domestic intelligence information at his disposal, have meant by such a statement? I leave it to the reader to reach their own conclusion.
Next, I am going to use the words of Judges themselves. Judges have a strange little way of reaching conclusions allegedly using case law and jurisprudence. This effectively means they theoretically use the findings of previous judges to base their decision on the current case. Most of these rulings are reduced to short citations of a single sentence or a paragraph along with the case caption and where it is publicized (When judges do bad things and don't follow the law, they just don't publish their rulings - You see the secret is, Judges just censor from the general public most of the bad, unjust things they do.)
I recently had cause to research various rulings on immunity for Judges and State Governments. And I was astonished and devastated to learn the liberties they had taken and leaps of logic they had used to write the rules in their favor.
Using their own words, the first case I will cite is Wiggins v Hess (1976, CA8 Mo) 531 F2d 920 and Harley v Oliver (1976, CA9 Ark) 539 F2d 1143
"Judicial immunity applies even when judge acts maliciously and corruptly; judge loses his immunity from liability for damages in violation of 42 USCS &1983 ONLY if he acts in clear absence of jurisdiction."...
To read the rest of this article for free, please click here->;
Examiner. com Legal Evil? In their own words - Part 1 of 3 http://exm.nr/jhsah8
Those were my thoughts.
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
http://twitter.com/dmashakThis is a teaser from an article I wrote on Examiner.com:
From Public School, to... more
-
-
-
THE history of human growth and development is at the same time the history of the terrible struggle of every new idea heralding the approach of a brighter dawn. In its tenacious hold on tradition, the Old has never hesitated to make use of the foulest and cruelest means to stay the advent of the New, in whatever form or period the latter may have asserted itself. Nor need we retrace our steps into the distant past to realize the enormity of opposition, difficulties, and hardships placed in the path of every progressive idea. The rack, the thumbscrew, and the knout are still with us; so are the convict's garb and the social wrath, all conspiring against the spirit that is serenely marching on. http://www.makeahistory.com/index.php/recent-news/42954-emma-goldmanTHE history of human growth and development is at the same time the history of the... more
-
-
worrg
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
-
-
-
-
-
This (Washington, D.C.) is where America's real change must begin!!!
Subject: worth 30 seconds
No one has been able to explain to me why young men and women serve in the U.S. Military for 20 years, risking their lives protecting freedom, and only get 50% of their pay. While politicians hold their political positions in the safe confines of the capital, protected by these same men and women, and receive full pay retirement after serving one term. It just does not make any sense. Monday on Fox news they learned that the staffers of Congress family members are exempt from having to pay back student loans. This will get national attention if other news networks will broadcast it. When you add this to the below, just where will all of it stop? 35 States file lawsuit against the Federal Government Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention. This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on. This is an idea that we should address. For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform... in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. If each person that receives this will forward it on to 20 people, in three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around. Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States .." You are one of my 20.
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas JeffersonThis (Washington, D.C.) is where America's real change must begin!!!
Subject:... more
-
