Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution "guarantees to every state in this union a Republican form of government"....
Just after the completion and signing of the Constitution, in reply to a woman's inquiry as to the type of government the Founders had created, Benjamin Franklin said, "A Republic, if you can keep it."
Not only have we failed to keep it, most don't even know what it is.
A Republic is representative government ruled by law - this case, the Constitution. A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good).
Democracies always self-destruct when the non-productive majority realizes that it can vote itself handouts from the productive minority by electing the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury. To maintain their power, these candidates must adopt an ever-increasing tax and spend policy to satisfy the ever-increasing desires of the majority. As taxes increase, incentive to produce decreases, causing many of the once productive to drop out and join the non-productive. When there are no longer enough producers to fund the legitimate functions of government and the socialist programs, the democracy will collapse, always to be followed by a Dictatorship.
Even though nearly every politician, teacher, journalist and citizen believes that our Founders created a democracy, it is absolutely not true. The Founders knew full well the differences between a Republic and a Democracy. They repeatedly and emphatically said that they had founded a Republic.
Conversely, the word Democracy is not mentioned even once in the Constitution. It was F.D.R. who began calling America a Democracy, in an attempt to initiate a government ruled by the majority. He could not do the socialist things he did under a Republic.
Madison warned us of the dangers of democracies with these words, "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths..."
The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: Rule by Omnipotent Majority. In a Democracy, The Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man. Thomas Jefferson referred to a democracy as "elective despotism".
A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general. The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution
And therein lies the truth that those in our government today do not want the people to know or understand. But it is increasingly important that we DO know and understand, and be willing to fight for our Republic.
Thursday, September 4, 2014
NBC's Ed Shultz Again Talks On Subject He Knows Nothing About
NBC's Ed Schultz has once again decided to run his mouth on a subject that he obviously knows nothing about - Christianity and the Holy Bible (which he obviously has never really read).
His latest rant against Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson is so misinformed as to make Schultz look like the backwoods rube he thinks Robertson is.
According to Schultz, Robertson is no different from ISIS because, like ISIS, Robertson says they should convert or die. What the Schultz neglects to mention is the context - that ISIS is in the business of murdering innocent people, and under any civilized society, such people are supposed to be exterminated. It is not Christians who are crucifying children and putting their heads on stakes, or cutting off people's heads with a knife.
And when Schultz decides to bring religion into it by suggesting no decent religion would exercise the "convert or die" mantra, he obviously does not know that the God of Christianity states, "When you come upon heathens, ye shall smite them, kill them, drive them to the ends of the Earth." God understands evil, and knows it should be destroyed at every turn. He even says if your son is evil, he must be put to death.
Now tell me, Schultz, if you can manage it - would you not call ISIS and other radical Islamists who murder innocent people "heathens"?
If not, then perhaps you are the heathen.
In any case, you have no business commenting on Christianity or the Bible until you actually READ it.
Yeah, I know - I really should not engage in a battle of wits with someone who is only half prepared.
His latest rant against Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson is so misinformed as to make Schultz look like the backwoods rube he thinks Robertson is.
According to Schultz, Robertson is no different from ISIS because, like ISIS, Robertson says they should convert or die. What the Schultz neglects to mention is the context - that ISIS is in the business of murdering innocent people, and under any civilized society, such people are supposed to be exterminated. It is not Christians who are crucifying children and putting their heads on stakes, or cutting off people's heads with a knife.
And when Schultz decides to bring religion into it by suggesting no decent religion would exercise the "convert or die" mantra, he obviously does not know that the God of Christianity states, "When you come upon heathens, ye shall smite them, kill them, drive them to the ends of the Earth." God understands evil, and knows it should be destroyed at every turn. He even says if your son is evil, he must be put to death.
Now tell me, Schultz, if you can manage it - would you not call ISIS and other radical Islamists who murder innocent people "heathens"?
If not, then perhaps you are the heathen.
In any case, you have no business commenting on Christianity or the Bible until you actually READ it.
Yeah, I know - I really should not engage in a battle of wits with someone who is only half prepared.
Monday, August 18, 2014
MO Highway Patrol Capt. Ron Johnson WAY off base
Missouri State Highway Patrol Capt. Ron Johnson, now in charge of security in Ferguson, MO said:
"When this is over, I'm going to go in my son's room. My black son, who wears his pants sagging, who wears his hat cocked to the side, got tattoos on his arms, but that's my baby."
Johnson added: "We all need to thank the Browns for Michael. Because Michael's going to make it better for our sons to be better black men."
I guess the Missouri State Highway Patrol is really hard up to have such a racist idiot as a Captain. The fact remains, and the video proves it, that Michael Brown was a thief and a bully, and if Captain Johnson wants to THANK him for that, then perhaps Johnson should resign from law enforcement.
As for their sons to "be better black men", why not simply start by having them try to be better MEN. It is the task of the parents to do that. Color has nothing to do with morality, and Michael Brown is not exactly a role model for anyone except perhaps budding gangsters.
"When this is over, I'm going to go in my son's room. My black son, who wears his pants sagging, who wears his hat cocked to the side, got tattoos on his arms, but that's my baby."
Johnson added: "We all need to thank the Browns for Michael. Because Michael's going to make it better for our sons to be better black men."
I guess the Missouri State Highway Patrol is really hard up to have such a racist idiot as a Captain. The fact remains, and the video proves it, that Michael Brown was a thief and a bully, and if Captain Johnson wants to THANK him for that, then perhaps Johnson should resign from law enforcement.
As for their sons to "be better black men", why not simply start by having them try to be better MEN. It is the task of the parents to do that. Color has nothing to do with morality, and Michael Brown is not exactly a role model for anyone except perhaps budding gangsters.
Friday, December 27, 2013
What the Climate Change Crowd DOESN'T Tell You
Except for possibly Pelosi & Reid on ObamaCare, I have never seen more BS about a subject than the BS that the Climate Change/Global Warming crowd puts forth. And it is high time the truth came out.
First - the climate is always changing. Always. Nothing stagnates for long in nature. And in nature, everything is cyclical. So, the BASIC premise is that the Earth gets warmer, then gets colder, then gets warmer, etc. But within that scenario there are anomalies.
Below I have a link to a chart from the esteemed Palomar Project that shows the base temperature of the earth throughout its existence, according to data provided by a variety of sciences, including geology, archaeology, paleontology, meteorology etc. This data is accepted by all major universities. And, as you can see, the Earth is typically much warmer than it is now. The natural, normal average temperature of Earth is roughly a whopping 22 degrees Farenheit warmer than it is now. This indicates that we would be coming out of a cooling period. The very tiny, last part of the chart (in orange) shows the only time frame Al Gore and the global warming crowd use for their bogus models.
In fact, science is aware of "The Little Ice Ice" (LIA) that took place from the 1300's until about 1850, when the Earth cooled somewhat, probably due to some unusual event, such as a supervolcano or a meteor strike. In any case, it take hundreds of years to come out of even a minor cooling period, so that would account for the gradual temperature increase we are experiencing. To assume it is caused by Man is to be incredibly arrogant - we are but mites on the face of this rock spinning through space.
Before LIA, the main producer of grapes for wine was found in England. When LIA hit, the major wine producing area was hundreds of miles further south, in southern France - where it still is, today. And England is still too cold to grow grapes.
Another item the Chicken Littles overlook - during every cool spell, civilization slowed, and was beleaguered with pestilence and wars, as people had to struggle and fight for adequate food. And during every warm period, civilization took off, as was the case during the Renaissance. Mankind fares MUCH better during the warm cycles.
So here is the short take - Earth's temperature is normally much warmer. Every so often something happens to cool the planet, such as a meteorite strike that creates a "nuclear winter", or a supervolcano (there are 12 on Earth) eruption that has the same effect. Such forces cool the Earth, and then it takes hundreds, thousands, of tens of thousands of years to get back to normal, depending on the severity of the cooling event. (in the 1800's, the island of Krakatoa exploded from volcanic activity. The ash filled the sky around the globe causing what history refers to as "the year without a summer")
So, here is the chart that shows we are still in a very cool period of Earth's history, with a long way to go before we hit "normal" temperature. Should anyone panic? Only the global warming/climate change nuts, who will be proven to be fear-mongering Chicken Littles.
/
First - the climate is always changing. Always. Nothing stagnates for long in nature. And in nature, everything is cyclical. So, the BASIC premise is that the Earth gets warmer, then gets colder, then gets warmer, etc. But within that scenario there are anomalies.
Below I have a link to a chart from the esteemed Palomar Project that shows the base temperature of the earth throughout its existence, according to data provided by a variety of sciences, including geology, archaeology, paleontology, meteorology etc. This data is accepted by all major universities. And, as you can see, the Earth is typically much warmer than it is now. The natural, normal average temperature of Earth is roughly a whopping 22 degrees Farenheit warmer than it is now. This indicates that we would be coming out of a cooling period. The very tiny, last part of the chart (in orange) shows the only time frame Al Gore and the global warming crowd use for their bogus models.
In fact, science is aware of "The Little Ice Ice" (LIA) that took place from the 1300's until about 1850, when the Earth cooled somewhat, probably due to some unusual event, such as a supervolcano or a meteor strike. In any case, it take hundreds of years to come out of even a minor cooling period, so that would account for the gradual temperature increase we are experiencing. To assume it is caused by Man is to be incredibly arrogant - we are but mites on the face of this rock spinning through space.
Before LIA, the main producer of grapes for wine was found in England. When LIA hit, the major wine producing area was hundreds of miles further south, in southern France - where it still is, today. And England is still too cold to grow grapes.
Another item the Chicken Littles overlook - during every cool spell, civilization slowed, and was beleaguered with pestilence and wars, as people had to struggle and fight for adequate food. And during every warm period, civilization took off, as was the case during the Renaissance. Mankind fares MUCH better during the warm cycles.
So here is the short take - Earth's temperature is normally much warmer. Every so often something happens to cool the planet, such as a meteorite strike that creates a "nuclear winter", or a supervolcano (there are 12 on Earth) eruption that has the same effect. Such forces cool the Earth, and then it takes hundreds, thousands, of tens of thousands of years to get back to normal, depending on the severity of the cooling event. (in the 1800's, the island of Krakatoa exploded from volcanic activity. The ash filled the sky around the globe causing what history refers to as "the year without a summer")
So, here is the chart that shows we are still in a very cool period of Earth's history, with a long way to go before we hit "normal" temperature. Should anyone panic? Only the global warming/climate change nuts, who will be proven to be fear-mongering Chicken Littles.
/
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Armando Montelongo Seminar Scam Alert
If you are even the least bit interested in real estate, you have heard of Armando Montelongo. Former star of "Flip This House", he now uses $1500 seminars and $40,000 "bus tours" to separate people from their money - people who only want a decent shot at financial security.
But few, if any of Armando's students ever discover financial security, primarily because Mr. Montelongo is much better at selling than he is at teaching.
In any case, I am happy to say that there is a new real estate investing scam alert website designed to help folks determine which real estate investing courses are scams, and which are not. Unfortunately, there are about a dozen scams for every legitimate course, and that is why www.scamsgalore.com has become necessary. There you will find the facts on the Armando Montelongo Scam Review and about 20 other gurus, from Carleton Sheets and Ron LeGrand to Than Merrill and Trump Entrepreneur Institute, so you can make the best decision for yourself and your goals.
/
But few, if any of Armando's students ever discover financial security, primarily because Mr. Montelongo is much better at selling than he is at teaching.
In any case, I am happy to say that there is a new real estate investing scam alert website designed to help folks determine which real estate investing courses are scams, and which are not. Unfortunately, there are about a dozen scams for every legitimate course, and that is why www.scamsgalore.com has become necessary. There you will find the facts on the Armando Montelongo Scam Review and about 20 other gurus, from Carleton Sheets and Ron LeGrand to Than Merrill and Trump Entrepreneur Institute, so you can make the best decision for yourself and your goals.
/
Saturday, September 7, 2013
A New Look At Obama & The Middle East
I am not a conspiracy theorist. But what I am about to post may sound like I have become one. I have not. This is an honest observation.
During the Arab Spring in Egypt, Obama (and Hillary) supported dethroning the secular government and allowing Islamists to take over.
In Libya, Obama (and Hillary) acted to take out the secular government and replace it with Islamists.
Now, in Syria, Obama wants to bomb the living crap out of the secular government which would most likely be replaced with Islamists.
It is not a "conspiracy theory" to see a pattern here. But why? Is it intentional?
Consider that behavioral science tells us that the foundations of a persons basic, most deeply held beliefs are formed during the first 5 years of life. And President Obama was raised as a Muslim for his first 7 years. And now, in just a couple of short years, he has been instrumental in turning secular middle-east countries into Islamist strongholds.
And now I begin to wonder if there is not a more diabolical endgame in store. Certainly Obama must know that if we lob bombs into Syria, both Syria and its allies will strike back. Then what? Escalation of hostility, with a very real threat of a World War, as Russia, China and the middle east could easily converge against Israel, America and our allies in Europe - exactly as prophesized in Revelations. The Bear of the North (Russia), the Kings of the East (China) against Israel and the Eagle of the West (America).
Is it possible that our leader is intent on being the catalyst that gives Islam the chance to rule the world?
Just food for thought. But what is undeniable is that every secular Middle East nation we have gotten involved in (with the exception of Israel) has been turned Islamist with the help of Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton.
During the Arab Spring in Egypt, Obama (and Hillary) supported dethroning the secular government and allowing Islamists to take over.
In Libya, Obama (and Hillary) acted to take out the secular government and replace it with Islamists.
Now, in Syria, Obama wants to bomb the living crap out of the secular government which would most likely be replaced with Islamists.
It is not a "conspiracy theory" to see a pattern here. But why? Is it intentional?
Consider that behavioral science tells us that the foundations of a persons basic, most deeply held beliefs are formed during the first 5 years of life. And President Obama was raised as a Muslim for his first 7 years. And now, in just a couple of short years, he has been instrumental in turning secular middle-east countries into Islamist strongholds.
And now I begin to wonder if there is not a more diabolical endgame in store. Certainly Obama must know that if we lob bombs into Syria, both Syria and its allies will strike back. Then what? Escalation of hostility, with a very real threat of a World War, as Russia, China and the middle east could easily converge against Israel, America and our allies in Europe - exactly as prophesized in Revelations. The Bear of the North (Russia), the Kings of the East (China) against Israel and the Eagle of the West (America).
Is it possible that our leader is intent on being the catalyst that gives Islam the chance to rule the world?
Just food for thought. But what is undeniable is that every secular Middle East nation we have gotten involved in (with the exception of Israel) has been turned Islamist with the help of Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Monday, July 1, 2013
Bill O'Reilly Has Started Drinkin' The Kool-Aid
I have been a fan of Bill O'Reilly since 2001, and hardly missed a show. But in the past year I have seen a change overtaking him and "The Factor". He has begun to over-compensate in the struggle to be "fair and balanced" and to keep the integrity of his "No Spin Zone."
Here is an example from tonight's show...
Bill and Brit Hume were discussing the immigration bill passed in the Senate, but unlikely to pass in the House. And I almost dropped my "No Spin Zone" mug when O'Reilly announced that, because there are some good things in the bill, Congress should hold their collective nose and just pass it. He said it is because we need immigration reform.
Yes, Bill, we do need immigration reform. But you are buying into the disingenuous argument that Chuck Schumer uses - that it's better than no bill at all.
That is the "kool-aid" argument, used in the infamous "Jonestown" debacle. "Go ahead and drink up - the Kool-Aid will cover the taste of the poison."
So now O'Reilly is drinking the proverbial kool-aid.
Newsflash for Bill - it's not a case of either passing that bad bill or passing no bill at all. There is another option - write and pass a better bill. It does not have to happen tomorrow. There is plenty of time.
To Mr. O'Reilly I would simply say, "Bill, let's take the poison out of the Kool-Aid and then we can drink up."
As a side-note, I have a simple, effective plan for real immigration reform. It could be in a one page Bill...
First, every immigrant who wants to come in to find work would automatically be rubber-stamped a "guest worker" permit, provided the individual passes a records check and gets immunized. There is no "path to citizenship" associated with the permit, but any Guest Worker who wishes to apply for citizenship may do so, just like anyone else. No cutting in front of anyone. No government benefits of any kind. And he may not be, or remain unemployed for more than 30 days in any given year. E-verify to check. Like a person on probation, they must keep authorities apprised of their whereabouts on a bi-weekly basis.
What this does is this - anyone found crossing the border other than through the front gate with a work permit would automatically be presumed to be either a criminal or a terrorist (honest people can come through the front gate), and must be imprisoned until they can be deported. . The border would, of course, have to become more secure, as an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. But it would not be necessary to secure the border immediately because the tide would have been stemmed. What liberal or Democrat could then make an argument to NOT secure the border, since the only people sneaking across are determined to harm us?
So, every honest immigrant gets to come in and have a shot at grabbing the ring. And criminals & terrorists would have been sifted out - they would be the only ones sneaking in, and more resources would be left available to capture and hold them.
And there is no path to citizenship other than the path every other immigrant must follow.
Meanwhile, any immigrant with an education or trade that America can benefit from would be fast-tracked.
And what about an immigrant's family? They can all come, provided they are, and remain, self-supporting and do not break our laws.
But they would not use up America's entitlements, nor would they be permitted to vote unless and until they manage to become naturalized citizens.
Because they are not American citizens. They are citizens of their mother country and they are our guests. Nothing more, nothing less.
/
Here is an example from tonight's show...
Bill and Brit Hume were discussing the immigration bill passed in the Senate, but unlikely to pass in the House. And I almost dropped my "No Spin Zone" mug when O'Reilly announced that, because there are some good things in the bill, Congress should hold their collective nose and just pass it. He said it is because we need immigration reform.
Yes, Bill, we do need immigration reform. But you are buying into the disingenuous argument that Chuck Schumer uses - that it's better than no bill at all.
That is the "kool-aid" argument, used in the infamous "Jonestown" debacle. "Go ahead and drink up - the Kool-Aid will cover the taste of the poison."
So now O'Reilly is drinking the proverbial kool-aid.
Newsflash for Bill - it's not a case of either passing that bad bill or passing no bill at all. There is another option - write and pass a better bill. It does not have to happen tomorrow. There is plenty of time.
To Mr. O'Reilly I would simply say, "Bill, let's take the poison out of the Kool-Aid and then we can drink up."
As a side-note, I have a simple, effective plan for real immigration reform. It could be in a one page Bill...
First, every immigrant who wants to come in to find work would automatically be rubber-stamped a "guest worker" permit, provided the individual passes a records check and gets immunized. There is no "path to citizenship" associated with the permit, but any Guest Worker who wishes to apply for citizenship may do so, just like anyone else. No cutting in front of anyone. No government benefits of any kind. And he may not be, or remain unemployed for more than 30 days in any given year. E-verify to check. Like a person on probation, they must keep authorities apprised of their whereabouts on a bi-weekly basis.
What this does is this - anyone found crossing the border other than through the front gate with a work permit would automatically be presumed to be either a criminal or a terrorist (honest people can come through the front gate), and must be imprisoned until they can be deported. . The border would, of course, have to become more secure, as an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. But it would not be necessary to secure the border immediately because the tide would have been stemmed. What liberal or Democrat could then make an argument to NOT secure the border, since the only people sneaking across are determined to harm us?
So, every honest immigrant gets to come in and have a shot at grabbing the ring. And criminals & terrorists would have been sifted out - they would be the only ones sneaking in, and more resources would be left available to capture and hold them.
And there is no path to citizenship other than the path every other immigrant must follow.
Meanwhile, any immigrant with an education or trade that America can benefit from would be fast-tracked.
And what about an immigrant's family? They can all come, provided they are, and remain, self-supporting and do not break our laws.
But they would not use up America's entitlements, nor would they be permitted to vote unless and until they manage to become naturalized citizens.
Because they are not American citizens. They are citizens of their mother country and they are our guests. Nothing more, nothing less.
/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)